>> GLAD TO HAVE YOU WITH US THIS MORNING. [1. DECLARATION OF A QUORUM AND CALL MEETING TO ORDER] [00:00:03] WE DO HAVE COUNCIL MEMBERS HERE. WE HAVE COUNCILMAN [INAUDIBLE] THAT IS JOINING US VIA ZOOM, BUT LET'S HAVE A ROLL-CALL, PLEASE. >> MAYOR BROWN. >> PRESENT. >> [INAUDIBLE]. >> PRESENT >> THANK YOU. WE HAVE ALL OF OUR COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT. BEFORE WE START OUR DISCUSSION ITEMS, SOME HOUSEKEEPING CHORES. COUNCIL, ITEM 3G IS IN GREEN, 3G ON OUR WORKSHOP WILL BE DEFERRED. WE'RE REMOVING THAT FROM THE AGENDA THIS MORNING. WE STILL NEED TO GET SOME MORE DETAILS ON THAT. THAT'LL BE COMING BACK TO US COMING UP HERE AT A FUTURE WE'LL JUMP ON THAT. LET'S MOVE TO ITEM 3A PLEASE JANELLE. [3.A.Clarification Of Consent And Regular City Council Agenda Items - This Is An Opportunity For City Council To Ask Questions Of Staff On Consent And Regular Agenda Items (20 Min)] >> THREE A. CLARIFICATION OF CONSENT AND REGULAR CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEMS. THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR REGULAR CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEMS. >> BEFORE WE GO INTO THAT COUNCIL, BRIAN, I'M GOING TO BRING YOU FORWARD OR YOU'RE ALREADY HERE TO EDUCATE US ON 10A. I UNDERSTAND THERE'S SOME CHANGES ON THAT AND THAT WAS DIFFERENT THAN OUR PACKET MATERIAL. >> [OVERLAPPING] I KNOW DOMINATED CHANGE YESTERDAY. I'VE GOT THE MOST PART. WAS THERE A SPECIFIC QUESTION ABOUT IT? >> WELL, WE HEARD IT WAS JUST GIVEN TO US. I THINK. JANELLE IS THAT DISSOLVE COUNCIL HAVE THAT NEW ORDINANCE? >> YES IT'S ON THE TABLE. >> DIFFERENT BETWEEN THIS AND WHAT WAS IN THE BACK? WHAT IS ALL OF THIS? >> NO. MUCH OF THIS IS IN THE BACK. >> WHICH WERE ADDED TO PREVENT COMMERCIAL CUSTOMERS FROM ILLEGALLY DUMPING IN THE CITY TRASH CANS THAT ARE THERE IN THE RIGHT-OF-WAY AS WE PROPOSE ELIMINATING THE BRACKETS AFTERWARDS. >> YES. >> WE WERE CONCERNED THAT IF WITH OUR CHANGES THAT WE WERE MAKING, THAT PERHAPS PEOPLE MAY USE THE PUBLIC TRASH CANS ON THE SIDEWALK INSTEAD OF FOLLOWING THE RULES. WE PUT A PROHIBITION IN HERE OF THAT. >> THAT'S GOOD. >> I DO HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT THIS. THE COMMERCIAL SERVICE THAT WE PROVIDE IS JUST ONE DAY A WEEK, CORRECT? >> NO DOUBT THAT DOWN. >> THAT'S WHERE I GOT MY THOUGHT WAS A LITTLE DIFFERENT LAST TIME WE DISCUSSED THIS BECAUSE DOWNTOWN IT WAS SEVEN DAYS A WEEK AND EXPENSIVE. BUT JUST AROUND TOWN. WHY WOULD WE CHARGE ANOTHER RATE FOR THE EXACT SAME SERVICE THAT WE GIVE TO RESIDENTIAL SERVICES? >> COMMERCIAL WASTE IS INHERENTLY DIFFERENT. RESIDENTIAL SOLID WASTES FROM THAT, YOU'RE PUTTING HOUSEHOLD WASTE IN THERE IS TYPICALLY ASSOCIATED WITH THE BUSINESS PROCESSES. THE HEAVIER TRASH USUALLY HAVE MORE DEMAND. YOU ALWAYS HAVE EXTRAS. IT'S AN EXPENSIVE ENDEAVOR. IN ADDITION, WE HAVE A PUBLIC OR A PRIVATE OPTION AND I DON'T THINK WE'RE SERVING OUR RESIDENTS BY PROVIDING AN INEXPENSIVE SERVICE FOR THE COMMERCIAL. >> BUT THERE ARE COMMERCIAL BUSINESSES OUT THERE THAT HAVE THE SAME TRASH CAN THAT OUR RESIDENTS HAVE? >> THEY PAY A COMMERCIAL RATE. >> NO. THEY PAY THE SAME RATE RIGHT NOW. THE $53. >> BUT THE RESIDENTS PAID 24. THEY DON'T PAY THE SAME RATE. >> SO IT'S A LITTLE BIT LOWER RATE? >> YES. >> BUT YOU'RE PICKING UP ONE DAY A WEEK JUST LIKE THE RESIDENTS. >> IT'S TRUE. >> I HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THAT BECAUSE OF THE SERVICE YOU PROVIDE IS THE SAME SERVICE. >> THAT'S THE SAME SERVICE FOR DOWNTOWN TOO WE PICKUP TRUCK. >> NO. >> IT'S WHAT WE DO. >> IT'S NOT THE SAME SERVICE AS DOWNTOWN BECAUSE IT'S SEVEN DAYS A WEEK. >> WELL NOW WE'RE DIRECTLY COMPETING AGAINST ALL OF THESE PRIVATE OPERATORS. WE'RE ONE OF THE ONLY CITIES THAT DOES THIS. >> THAT'S BY CHARTER IN ESSENCE WE ARE. >> NO IT'S AN ORDINANCE IT'S NOT BY CHARTER. >> NO. >> NOW, WE'VE STEPPED OUT INTO AN AREA WE PROBABLY SHOULD HAVE NEVER GOTTEN INTO YEARS AGO. THEIR WASTE IS TRULY THAT LIGHT. THEIR COMMERCIAL OPTION WOULDN'T BE ANY WHOLE LOT MORE INNER PAIN ANYWAY, AND THAT'S WHAT THEY SHOULD HAVE THOUGH, IS A COMMERCIAL OPTIONS. [00:05:01] >> THIS IS DIRECTLY TIED TO THE COMMERCIAL RATES IN THE PRIVATE SECTOR IS CHARGING RIGHT NOW. WE'RE UNDERCUTTING THE PRIVATE SECTOR BY MORE THAN 50% OF THEIR PRICES RIGHT NOW. >> AND ASKING THE RESIDENTS TO SUBSIDIZE IT >> SLOW DOWN I'M JUST WORRIED ABOUT THAT. THERE'S BUSINESSES OUT THERE THAT ARE COMMERCIAL BUSINESSES THAT ARE JUST SMALL OPERATORS. THEY CAN'T HAVE A DUMPSTER, THERE'S NOT ENOUGH ROOM TO HAVE A DUMPSTER. >> YOU'LL BE SURPRISED, WE'VE GOT BUSINESSES SCATTERED THROUGHOUT RESIDENTIAL AREAS THAT HAVE DUMPSTERS IN ALLEYS THAT WE SERVE AS RESIDENT CUSTOMERS. I DON'T THINK SPACE CONSTRAINTS ARE THAT HUGE. >> BUT THESE ARE SMALL BUSINESSES THAT MIGHT NOT BE ABLE TO AFFORD A DUMPSTER EACH MONTH. >> OR DON'T NEED A DUMPSTER. >> OR NEED A DUMPSTER EACH MONTH. THOSE ARE THE ONES I'M CONCERNED WITH THAT THEY HAVE VERY LITTLE WASTE. THEY USE A RESIDENTIAL TRASH CAN. THEY HAVE ONE OR TWO TRASH CANS OUT THERE. AND NOW WE'RE GOING INTO THIS MUCH HIGHER PRICE OVER DOUBLE. I'M A LITTLE CONCERNED ABOUT THOSE BUSINESSES. I COMPLETELY UNDERSTAND IF WE NEED TO MAKE MORE MONEY OR IF WE ARE PROVIDING AN ADDITIONAL SERVICE OR LOSSES, MORE MONEY TO DO THAT. IT'S ONE THING, BUT THERE ARE BUSINESSES OUT THERE THAT ARE GETTING THE SAME SERVICE IN HAD THE SAME TRASH AS A RESIDENTIAL CUSTOMER. >> OUR RESIDENTIAL RATES ARE NOT ADEQUATE RIGHT NOW, THEY NEED TO BE INCREASED. WE SHOWED YOU THE FINANCIAL STATEMENT LAST TIME AND WE NEED TO INCREASE IT THE NEXT YEAR. I MEAN, IF YOU WANT TO PUSH THE COST OFF ON THE RESIDENTS, WE CAN DO THAT, BUT THE REVENUE HAS GOT TO HAVE THEM SOMEWHERE. >> MAY I INTERJECT? I THINK JOHN'S ASKING THE QUESTION, WHY IS SMALL BUSINESS PICKUP MORE EXPENSIVE THAN RESIDENTIAL PICKUP? >> WE LOOKED AT IT AS A BLOCK. WE HAVE 600 COMMERCIAL CUSTOMERS AND WE LOOKED AT IT AS A TOTAL BUSINESS UNIT. THAT WAS HOW WE DID THE ANALYSIS. WE DIDN'T DO IT ON A STOP-BY-STOP BASIS. WE LOOK AT THE ENTIRE BUSINESS UNIT, THE ENTIRE COLLECTION OPPORTUNITY, AND WE LOOKED AT WHAT IT COST US. WE'RE RUNNING INTO DEFICIT. WE DIDN'T WANT SEE INTO IT, WE JUST LEARNED. >> THEN HOW SUBJECTIVE DO YOU WANT TO GET WITH DETERMINING WHAT SMALL BUSINESSES COSTS LESS THAN OR COST WHAT A RESIDENTIAL CUSTOMER COSTS AND JUST TRASH BASED ON VOLUME. >> WE HAVE A GREAT, GREAT SYSTEM NOW THAT WE HAVE ALL THIS DATA COMING IN, WE HAVE VIDEO OF ALL THIS DATA. I DON'T WANT TO GET INTO THE WEEDS ON THIS. I THINK THIS IS GOING TO HURT SOME SMALL BUSINESSES OUT THERE THAT RELY ON $53 A MONTH TRASH CAN THAT THEY MIGHT NOT EVEN FILL UP. WE'RE NOT PROVIDING THEM ANY OTHER ANY ADDITIONAL SERVICE THAT WE WOULD OUR RESIDENTS AND THEY'RE STILL PAYING MORE FOR IT. >> THEY HAVE A COMMERCIAL OPTIONS. >> WELL, LET ME ASK YOU A QUESTION. HOW MANY BUSINESSES WE'VE TALKED? >> ABOUT 600. WE JUST DON'T HAVE THE BIG PACE. WE HAVE 18,000 RESIDENTIAL CUSTOMER, 600 [OVERLAPPING]. >> SAY COMMERCIAL CUSTOMERS WITH IF YOU WANT TO KEEP THEM, THEY ONLY HAVE ONE CAN. I GUESS THAT WOULD BE AN OPTION, BUT MOST OF OUR COMMERCIAL CUSTOMERS HAVE MORE THAN ONE CAN. WE'RE THE ONLY CITY DOING THIS AND YOU ARE THE ONLY CITY ASKING YOUR RESIDENTIAL CUSTOMERS TO ABSORB THE COST OF COMMERCIAL BUSINESSES. GREAT TO BE BUSINESS FRIENDLY, BUT I'M ASKING GRANDMA TO PICKUP A BUSINESSES TARGETS. >> THAT'S NOT WHAT I'M ASKING. I'M NOT ASKING FOR OUR RESIDENTIAL CUSTOMERS TO PICK UP THE TAB ON ADDITIONAL SERVICES. I'M ASKING, DO WE HAVE A REALLY GOOD GRASP OF WHO IS ACTUALLY. >> THE QUESTION MIGHT BE. >> WHO IS ACTUALLY COSTING US MORE MONEY? >> DO I KNOW WHAT OR BUSINESS ABC AND BUSINESS QUE? NO, I LOOKED AT IT AS JUST AN ENTIRE BLOCK OF SERVICE, LOOKED AT THE COST TO OPERATE AND THE REVENUE COMING IN FROM THAT OPERATION. >> IF THIS WAS OUT IN THE COMMERCIAL MARKET, THEY HAVE MULTI-LEVEL SUB SERVICES. I THINK JOHN IS RIGHT. I THINK WE WILL BE HURTING SOME SMALL BUSINESSES. MAYBE IT IS WHAT BRIAN JUST SAID, [INAUDIBLE] A SMALL BUSINESS AND YOU CAN DO ONE TRASH CAN AND IT'S DONE, THEN YOU HAVE THE, EVEN IF IT GOES TO THE HUNDREDS [OVERLAPPING] >> BECAUSE THEN WHAT YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE IS A BUNCH OF BUSINESSES TRYING TO GET BY WITH ONE TRASH CAN AND DUMPING THEIR OTHER STUFF [OVERLAPPING] >> WELL, YEAH, WE DON'T WANT THAT TO HAPPEN EITHER. PROBLEM NEXT TO IT. BUT AGAIN, WE HAVE SOME GREAT TOOLS IN OUR ARSENAL THAT WE CAN UNDERSTAND THAT BETTER, WE CAN SEE IT, WE HAVE VIDEO OF IT. I'M GOING TO PROBABLY ASK FOR A DEFERRAL ON THIS. I'M ALL ON BOARD ON DOWNTOWN, BECAUSE I THINK THAT IS A SERVICE THAT PROBABLY WE DON'T NEED TO BE IN. I APOLOGIZE FOR THIS BECAUSE I SHOULD HAVE DONE MY HOMEWORK BEFORE NOW. BUT I NEED TO LOOK AT THAT A LITTLE BIT MORE ON THE SMALL BUSINESS SIDE OF THINGS. MAYBE IT'S FINE. MAYBE I DON'T HAVE ANY- >> I AGREE WITH YOU. [00:10:01] >> OPPOSITION OUT THERE. >> I AGREE WITH WHAT YOU ARE SAYING. >> I JUST DON'T UNDERSTAND HOW WE CAN SIT HERE AND TALK ABOUT HOW WE WANT TO CHARGE SHORT-TERM RENTAL OWNERS MORE FOR TRASH, BUT THE SAME SMALL BUSINESSES PUTTING HEAVIER TRASH IN THE TRASH CAN, WE DON'T WANT TO CHARGE THEM MORE. >> YOU'RE MAKING IT SOUND LIKE WE'RE JUST TOTALLY NOT IN FAVOR OF THIS AT ALL AND THAT'S NOT AT IT. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE NOT HURTING OUR SMALL BUSINESSES IN TOWN, AND I APOLOGIZE FOR NOT THINKING OF THIS ON OUR LAST WORKSHOP. >> COUNCIL, LET ME MENTION THIS. WELL, JUST FOR CLARIFICATION RIGHT NOW, IT'S GOOD TO GET OUR THOUGHTS OUT, BUT IF WE'RE GOING TO DISCUSS THE PROS AND CONS BEFORE WE VOTE ON THIS, THAT'S FOR THE REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING THIS AFTERNOON. >> [INAUDIBLE] FOR WORKSHOP. >> WELL, THIS IS FOR CLARIFICATION OF THIS ITEM [OVERLAPPING] THAT JOHN IS TALKING IN FAVOR OF ANOTHER APPROACH, AND WE'LL ENTERTAIN THAT THIS AFTERNOON. ANY FURTHER THOUGHTS FROM ABOUT DUSTIN TO [OVERLAPPING] >> NO. WE'LL GIVE IT SOME THOUGHT, WE CAN TRY TO GET A LITTLE MORE SPECIFIC. I DON'T KNOW THAT WE CAN DO IT BY TONIGHT'S COUNCIL MEETING, BUT [INAUDIBLE]. >> THANK YOU. VERY GOOD. JOHN, IF YOU DON'T MIND, WE'LL START WITH YOU ON THE CLARIFICATION OF ITEMS. [LAUGHTER] >> I'LL TALK 10A, 11A, AIRPORT AUDIT PLAN. CAN I JUST GET A LITTLE BACKGROUND ON THE AIRPORT AUDIT PLAN? IT SEEM WE'RE WANTING TO AUDIT THINGS FROM $500 AND INCREASE THAT AMOUNT TO $5,000. >> WE HAVE KERRY WITH US THAT'S INVOLVED WITH THAT. KERRY, FOR THE CAMERA, IDENTIFY YOURSELF, WHO YOU ARE. >> I'M KERRY [INAUDIBLE], THE ASSISTANT CITY AUDITOR. CAN I SIT? >> YES. [LAUGHTER] >> WE EXPANDED THE SCOPE. ORIGINALLY, WE WERE LOOKING AT ALL THE ASSETS OVER 5,000, AND TAMMY JACOBS AND LUGSDIN HAVE A REALLY GOOD SYSTEM ALREADY GOING FOR THAT. WE GOT WITH DAN AND WE THOUGHT IT WOULD BE MORE BENEFICIAL TO LOOK AT ASSETS UNDER 5,000 TO SEE HOW THE DIFFERENT DEPARTMENTS ARE HANDLING THOSE. >> ARE WE SUPER CONCERNED WITH ASSETS UNDER $5,000? >> WHAT KIND OF ASSETS WOULD THEY BE? >> LIKE A TRACTOR OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT OR LAWNMOWER. >> I DON'T KNOW [INAUDIBLE] LESS THAN $5,000. >> I SAID [OVERLAPPING] ADVISORY BOARD. [LAUGHTER] I HAD THIS ITEM DOWN TOO BECAUSE I'M TRYING TO THINK, WHAT ASSETS ARE WE LOOKING AT? >> LET'S, FIRST OF ALL, LET'S CLARIFY AND I ASKED BRIAN THIS THE OTHER DAY, WHO BROUGHT THIS FORWARD? >> WE DID. GLENN AND I TALKED [OVERLAPPING] >> IT CAME FORM THE AUDITOR'S OFFICE. THIS DID NOT COME FROM STAFF. >> NO. WE TALKED WITH DAN ABOUT IT. >> IN MY QUESTION IN KERRY AND I I TALKED ABOUT THIS YESTERDAY. WE JUST APPROVED A VERY BUSY AUDIT PLAN FOR OUR AUDITOR, AND NOW THAT WE GOT TO WE'RE ADDING MORE. I UNDERSTAND THIS IS TO AMEND THE '23 PLAN IS STILL TIES HIM UP FOR THREE MONTHS, I THINK, YOU SAID IT TOOK FOR THIS AUDITORS. >> AN ESTIMATE, AND I WORK ON SEVERAL AT ONE TIME. >> I WAS FASCINATED ON WHO BROUGHT THIS FORWARD. IF IT'S COMING FROM STAFF THAT THEY FEEL IT'S APPROPRIATE TO HAVE THIS AMENDED AUDIT, THAT'S FINE, BUT APPARENTLY IT'S NOT. YES, MA'AM. >> I HAVE A QUESTION ON THAT. LIKE, WHY WOULD IT COME FROM STAFF WHEN THE INTERNAL AUDITORS WORK FOR COUNSEL? >> IT DIDN'T COME FROM STAFF. IT CAME FROM THE AUDITOR'S OFFICE. >> IT DIDN'T COME FROM STAFF. >> WELL, SHE SAID THEY TALKED TO DAN. >> WELL, OF COURSE, [INAUDIBLE]. >> THEY THOUGHT IT WOULD BE A GOOD IDEA JUST TO LOOK, BECAUSE LIKE WE HAVE TRANSFORMERS THAT JUST TO SEE WHAT THE DEPARTMENTS ARE DOING ACTUALLY, BECAUSE WE DON'T KNOW, AND THEY ALREADY MAY BE TAKING CARE OF IT AND IT MAY BE PERFECT AND IT MAY ONLY TAKE ME A LITTLE BIT OF TIME TO GO IN AND LOOK AT THEIR LIST, BUT WE JUST THOUGHT IT WOULD BE GOOD IDEA TO GO TO THE AIRPORT BECAUSE IT WOULD BE THE [NOISE] SMALLEST. >> WE HAVE MARIE AND DAVID. >> MAYBE A LITTLE CLARITY WILL HELP. THE AUDITORS CAME TO ME AND THEY ASKED IF I THOUGHT IT WOULD BE AN EFFECTIVE WAY TO LOOK AT HOW THE CITY CONTROLS, AND LET'S SAY, PORTABLE ASSETS, $205,000 GENERATORS, LAWNMOWERS, THINGS THAT CAN WALK AWAY. HOW IS THE CITY CONTROLLING THOSE? ARE WE DOING A CONSISTENT ACROSS THE CITY? WE PICK THE AIRPORT BECAUSE IT'S SMALL. IT'S A SMALL ENTITY WITHIN THE CITY. THEY CAN LOOK AT THE AIRPORT, THEY CAN SEE WHAT CONTROLS WE HAVE, HOW WE'RE CONTROLLING THESE PORTABLE ASSETS THAT CAN EASILY WALK AWAY. THEN WE'RE GOING TO SEE IF WE'RE DOING THAT CONSISTENTLY ACROSS THE CITY. IT MAKES A LOT OF SENSE TO ME. WE NEED TO KNOW. >> ARE WE DOING IT ACROSS THE WHOLE CITY, OR? >> STARTED WITH THE AIRPORT BECAUSE IT'S SUCH A SMALL, CONFINED UNIT WE CAN LOOK THERE FIRST AND SEE HOW IT'S DONE THERE AND THEN WE COMPARE THAT. [00:15:02] WHEN YOU GO TO PUBLIC WORKS YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THERE COULD BE DOZENS OR HUNDREDS GENERATORS OR PUMPS, AND THOSE THINGS CAN DISAPPEAR. WE NEED TO KNOW THAT WE DO HAVE GOOD CONTROLS ON HOW WE UTILIZE, KEEP MAINTAINING [OVERLAPPING] >> I CAN UNDERSTAND THAT. >> YES, MIKE TO COME UP FOR A MINUTE. HE'S HERE. >> [INAUDIBLE]. >> MICHAEL COULDN'T HAVE HAD ANYTHING TO DO WITH THIS. >> I UNDERSTAND, BUT HOW MANY ASSETS DO YOU HAVE THAT ARE FROM ZERO TO $5,000? >> WE GOT A LOT OF TOOLS, AND THERE'S PRINTERS AND COPIERS AND CHAIRS AND STUFF LIKE THAT. >> DAVID, YOU HAD A QUESTION. >> WELL, THIS IS AN AMENDMENT TO THE '23 PLAN? >> CORRECT. >> YES. >> I REALIZE '23 IS ALMOST OVER. >> YES. [LAUGHTER] THAT'S WHERE I'M EXPANDING THE TIME TO GO INTO THE NEXT YEAR. >> WHAT IS THE IMPACT ON THE '24 PLAN BECAUSE OF THAT APPEARS TO BE FAIRLY BUSY. I THINK THERE'S SOME THINGS WE COULD AFFORD TO TAKE OFF OF IT AND WE'LL BE TALKING ABOUT THAT, OF COURSE. >> YEAH. WELL, AND YOU GUYS TOOK THOSE TWO AUDITS OFF, SO THAT FREED UP SOME TIME. WE WORK FOR CITY COUNCIL. WHATEVER OUR AUDIT PLAN IS, YOU GUYS CAN CHANGE IT OR AMENDED AT ANY TIME. >> BUT WE DEPEND ON YOU TO BRING THESE THINGS FORWARD TO IT. >> YES, WE WILL. >> THIS IS REALLY AN AMENDMENT TO '23, BUT IT'S GOING TO BLEED INTO '24. THAT'S GOING TO IMPACT '24 AUDIT PLAN. I THINK IT OUGHT TO BE EXTENDED LEAST LISTED AS PART OF THE '24 AUDIT PLAN. >> OKAY. >> MARIE. >> SEEMS LIKE TO ME AND LIGHT UP, BUT JUST RECENTLY HAPPENED WITH THE FISHING PAYMENT, THIS WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE BETTER SUITED FOR THE CITY. LIKE ADDING THAT INTO OUR '24 AUDIT PLAN, LOOKING AT THE INTERNAL CONTROLS FOR DOING AN ASSESSMENT OF SMALL ASSETS AND THEN MOVING ON TO LARGE ASSETS. >> JOHN, ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS ON THAT? >> KERRY. >> WE CAN TALK ABOUT IT AND GET TOGETHER AND DISCUSS A PLAN AND SEE WHAT HE THINKS TO. >> KERRY, TO ANSWER MARIE'S QUESTION, WHEN YOU LOOK AT THIS AND WHEN YOU DO THIS AUDIT FOR THESE SMALL PURCHASES, DO YOU ALL COME UP WITH A CONTROLS FOR THIS STUFF? >> THAT'S WHAT WE'VE TRY TO DO. [OVERLAPPING] CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES AND HELP THEM KEEP TRACK OF THEIR SMALL ASSETS. >> THEN YOU WOULD USE THAT PROCEDURES AND THOSE CONTROLS THAT YOU CREATED LOOKING AT THE AIRPORT TO MOVE ON TO THE CITY'S ASSETS. >> YEAH, THAT'S OUR HOPE. >> [INAUDIBLE] AND STUFF LIKE THAT. >> YEAH, THAT IS OUR HOPE. >> MARIE, DOES THAT HELP IN ANY WAY, KNOWING THAT THEY'RE USING WHAT THEY LEARNED ON THIS AUDIT TO THEN COME TO THE CITY AND APPLY THAT? >> WELL, LET ME CLARIFY THAT, JOHN. DAN, WOULD YOU COME BACK UP FOR A SECOND. THERE'S A THOUGHT THAT THE AUDITOR'S OFFICE CAN AUDIT THAT TO SET UP POLICIES AND PROCEDURES TO MANAGE THAT. THAT'S MORE STAFF. IT'S NOT THE AUDITOR'S OFFICE. [OVERLAPPING]. >> MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS TO THIS AND SUGGESTIONS. >> IF THEY SEE SOMETHING THAT THEY CONSIDER NOT BEST PRACTICES, THEY TELL US THAT WE WOULD THEN MODIFY OUR PROCEDURES AND PROCESSES. [OVERLAPPING] THEY DON'T WRITE POLICIES. [OVERLAPPING]. >> I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY THAT THE AUDITOR'S OFFICE WOULDN'T PUT ALL THAT TOGETHER. [OVERLAPPING] THAT IS CORRECT. >> I HAVE A QUESTION THOUGH ON WHAT YOU JUST SAID, DAN. THEY COME TO YOU AND THEN YOU LOOK AT IT AND THEN WE GET THAT FINALIZED VERSION. >> I COMMENT ON THEIR FINAL REPORT AND THAT'S WHAT YOU'LL GET. ACTUALLY BRIAN COMMENTS ON IT, BUT IT'S [NOISE] THEIR REPORT THEY PROVIDED THE MANAGER'S OFFICE. MANAGER'S OFFICE PROVIDES THEIR COMMENTS. THEN IT COMES TO COUNCIL. >> IF THAT EVER RESULT IN CHANGES. >> OH, SURE. ABSOLUTELY. >> NOW, BUT WHAT WE SEE IT [INAUDIBLE] SINCE THEY WORK FOR US. >> WELL, IT'S NOT A GOT YOU, IT'S A FIX IT. [OVERLAPPING]. >> THE REPORT WOULD CHANGE. >> IF THE REPORT DOESN'T CHANGE. [OVERLAPPING]. >> THAT DOESN'T RESULT IN CHANGES, AND YOU SAID YES. >> WELL, THAT'S WHAT YOU'LL SEE IN THE MANAGER'S COMMENTS. WE SAY WE AGREE, WE DISAGREE OR WE IMPLEMENT. [OVERLAPPING]. >> WILL BE IMPLEMENTING THE FOLLOWING CHANGES. >> THAT'S IT. WHEN YOU LOOK AT ALL THE REPORTS I'VE DONE, THERE WAS A MANAGER'S COMMENTS AND ROUTINELY WILL SAY WE AGREE WITH THEIR RECOMMENDATIONS, WHERE WE MAKE THOSE CHANGES AND THEN THEY DO A FOLLOW UP TO SEE IF WE MADE THE CHANGES. THAT'S THE WAY IT'S BEEN [OVERLAPPING]. >> THE COUNCIL IS COPIED ON EVERY TIME. >> YEAH. NOTHING COMES OUT OF THEIR REPORT. WE JUST PROVIDE COMMENTS IN RESPONSE TO WHAT THEY SEE. THEN WE WOULD DRAFT THE POLICIES, PROCEDURES, PROCESSES. >> WE HAVE MS. LOUIS AND THEN MIKE [INAUDIBLE]. MS. LOUIS. >> YOU WOULD PUT IN PLACE A SYSTEM THAT WOULD WORK IN EVERY DEPARTMENT? THAT'S ONE QUESTION, BUT I GUESS MY FIRST QUESTION WOULD HAVE BEEN WHAT DID THEY ALREADY HAVE [00:20:02] A SYSTEM THAT PRETTY MUCH CONTROLS WHAT'S 5,000 [OVERLAPPING]. >> THEY PROBABLY GIVE US A THUMBS UP. >> YEAH. >> THE BIG ROLE THE AUDITORS TO CHECK TO MAKE SURE THAT WE DO HAVE THOSE GOODS SYSTEMS AND PROCESSES IN PLACE. >> IF THEY DO, BUT IF YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT CHANGING POLICY, WOULD THEY HAVE TO CHANGE WHAT THEY'RE DOING, HOW THEY'RE DOING IT, AND YOU CREATE THIS POLICY ACROSS THE BOARD? >> I'M CONFUSED ON THE THEY. >> THE AUDITORS. >> THEY DON'T CHANGE POLICY. >> OKAY. IF THEY COME BACK AND MAKE COMMENTS AND SAY THIS ONE HAS A GREAT PROCEDURE. >> YES, MA'AM. >> BUT THIS ONE DOES NOT. IS POLICY CREATED TO COVER EVERY DEPARTMENT? >> YES. >> OKAY, EVEN THOUGH THEY HAVE SOMETHING GOOD IN PLACE THAT WORKS, [OVERLAPPING]. >> IF THERE IS A BETTER WAY TO DO IT, THAT'S WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO. IF THERE'S A BETTER SYSTEM TO TRACK IT. >> IF THEY COME AND SAY, HEY, BEST PRACTICES ALREADY USE A CERTAIN BAR CODE ON THIS TYPE OF EQUIPMENT AND THEY BRING THAT UP AT THE AIRPORT, OUR COMMENT WOULD BE TO COUNSEL, WE'LL CORRECT IT AT THE AIRPORT AND CARRY THIS THROUGH AS A BEST PRACTICE IN OTHER AREAS. >> OKAY. >> SOMETHINGS YOU CAN PUT ELECTRONIC BAR CODE ON. A PIECE OF EQUIPMENT THAT WE USE TO CUT GRASS THAT DOESN'T FARE WELL. THERE HAS TO BE A DIFFERENT METHODOLOGY FOR THAT. THAT WOULD BE THE DIFFERENCE. WHAT APPLIES TO ONE MAY NOT APPLY TO THE SAME PIECE OF EQUIPMENT IN ANOTHER USE. >> OKAY. >> MIKE, YOU HAD A QUESTION. >> NO, I'M GOOD. >> OKAY. YES, JOHN. >> NO. >> KERRY, I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE WE'RE CLEAR THOUGH, BECAUSE THERE'S IN MY MIND A LITTLE FUZZINESS ON THIS. YOU DO THE AUDITING ON THIS. IF THERE'S CHANGE, IF THERE'S POLICIES THAT NEED TO BE ESTABLISHED TO CORRECT ANYTHING THAT COMES FROM STAFF AND YOU'LL JUST REPORT YOUR AUDIT FINDINGS AND THEY'LL PUT THOSE TOGETHER. >> YEAH. >> OKAY, SOUNDS GOOD. >> I'M GOING TO GO TO JUST REAL QUICK, ABOUT 11H THE HANGER PURCHASE. >> GOOD FOR YOU. >> I DON'T HAVE ANY PROBLEM WITH THE HANGER PURCHASE, SO FARMING, BUT I DO HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT WE SEE THE REVENUE SIDE OF THIS IN OUR REPORT. WE DON'T SEE THE EXPENSE SIDE. JUST TO FOLLOW UP ON THAT, IT'S 73 TO $77,000 IN REVENUE. THAT'S GREAT. WHERE'S THE EXPENSE SIDE OF THAT? HOW MUCH ARE WE REALLY BRING IT INTO THE AIRPORT EACH YEAR BY DOING THIS? >> WELL, ESTIMATING RIGHT NOW, 5% MAINTENANCE COST PER YEAR, IT'S ON ONE SHEET IN YOUR PACKET. WE RENTED OUT FOR 83,862 OR NET PROFIT WOULD BE 77,000. ESTIMATES. >> THAT'S NET PROFIT THAT YOU HAVEN'T IN SEPARATE REPORT? [OVERLAPPING] MAYBE DIDN'T GO FAR ENOUGH DOWN TO SEE IT. >> IDENTIFY YOURSELF, PLEASE, SIR, FOR THE CAMERA. >> MIKE, AIRPORT DIRECTOR. >> OKAY. THANK YOU. >> [INAUDIBLE] I'LL GET YOU UP HERE. IS THIS SOMETHING WHERE WE'VE PURCHASED SOME HANGERS IN THE PAST OUT THERE AT THE AIRPORT? DO WE AUDIT THOSE TO SEE IF THOSE ARE GOOD INVESTMENTS OR NOT? >> WE HAVE NOT. >> IS THAT SOMETHING THAT WE WOULD DO? >> I THINK THAT WOULD BE FINANCE. >> IS IT A FINANCE THING THAN AN AUDIT THING? >> YEAH. >> GOOD MORE OF A BEST PRACTICES, CONTROLS, TYPE ISSUE, THERE ARE NOT A FINANCIAL ADVISOR. >> YEAH. >> OKAY. THAT'S THAT'S ALL I HAD ON THAT ONE. [OVERLAPPING] ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON THAT HANGER THING? >> NO, SIR. [OVERLAPPING]. >> ANYTHING ELSE, JOHN? >> YES. [OVERLAPPING] THANK YOU VERY MUCH. [LAUGHTER] THANKS, KERRY. >> THEY CAN TURN THE HEAT OFF [OVERLAPPING]. >> WELL, MAYBE YOU'RE NOT OFF THE HOOK YET. WHAT DID I HAVE ON 11B? THE AUDITOR'S REPORT ON THIS STREET. >> THAT'S COMING OUT OF THE AUDITOR'S OFFICE ALSO. >> I GUESS MY QUESTION ON THIS IS, HOW DO WE USE THIS INFORMATION? [BACKGROUND]. >> WELL, JOHN, LET ME. >> YEAH. >> AT THE END OF THE AUDITOR'S REPORT, THERE'S A RECOMMENDATION ON WHAT SHOULD BE DONE AND I THINK BRIAN HAS ALREADY CHIMED IN AND THAT AUDITORS REPORT ON HOW THAT SHOULD BE MANAGED AND THEY ARE GOING TO ADOPT THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE AUDITOR'S ON THAT. RIGHT, BRIAN? >> CORRECT. >> IF SO THAT'S ON MOST OF THESE AUDIT PLANS? [LAUGHTER] THIS IS WHAT WE WOULD SEE AT THE END OF THE DAY. MARIA ASKED ABOUT THE OTHER AUDIT. [OVERLAPPING] WE WOULD GET A SIMILAR REPORTS LIKE THIS. >> WHERE WE HAVE SUGGESTIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS. THEN IT GOES TO THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE AND THEY DECIDE IF IT'S GOOD FOR THEIR DEPARTMENTS. >> IN THE BEST WAY TO IMPLEMENT IT. [00:25:01] >> YEAH. >> OKAY. MY QUESTION HERE WAS, SO YOU DID THIS AUDIT AND WHAT CAME OUT OF IT IS THAT YOU FOUND THAT WITHIN THESE CONTRACTS, THERE WAS NOT A WAY TO AUDIT THE CONTRACTOR? >> YES. I THOUGHT IT WAS A GOOD IDEA TO ADD IN THE RIGHT TO AUDIT AND THE DIFFERENT CONTRACTS IN CASE IT DOESN'T MEAN WE WILL, IT WILL BE MANAGEMENTS CALL. >> IT'S LIKE OR CBDG. >> YES. EXACTLY. >> BECAUSE WE'RE FOLLOWING THE SAME PROCESS. >> YES. >> JUST LIKE WE DO THIS ALL THE TIME, LIKE WE FOUND IN PRACTICE SEVERAL YEARS AGO, IT WAS BETTER TO USE THE FTA STANDARDS FOR POST ACCIDENT TESTING FOR ALL OF OUR CITY EMPLOYEES. WE HAVE TO DO IT FOR FTA. WE WERE RUNNING A BIFURCATED SYSTEM. NOW WE DO IT FOR ALL. THIS IS MUCH THE SAME. WE HAVE THIS PROCESS IN PLACE FOR CBDG CONTRACTING. WE'RE JUST GOING TO APPLY IT ACROSS THE BOARD. >> I THOUGHT IT WAS INTERESTING THAT YOU DID AN AUDIT TO FIND THAT YOU NEED TO DO MORE AUDITS? >> [LAUGHTER] WELL, WOULDN'T NECESSARILY BE ASKED DURING THE AUDIT. [OVERLAPPING]. >> SOME AUDITS. [OVERLAPPING] [LAUGHTER]. >> ABSOLUTELY. >> THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU, KERRY. >> THANKS. >> YES, JOHN. GO RIGHT AHEAD. >> FLOCK. WE JUST. >> 11-C. >> 11-C. I'M SORRY. MY QUESTION WOULD BE, DID WE JUST ASK THE RIGHT PERSON TO AGREE WITH OUR CHANGES THAT WE DID IN THE CONTRACT? WHEREAS BEFORE WE WERE JUST [OVERLAPPING] >> [OVERLAPPING] THE RIGHT PERSON, BECAUSE YOU ASKED ME. >> OH. OKAY, [LAUGHTER] I FIGURED IT, THERE WAS SOMETHING LIKE THAT >> GOOGLE CLOUD. >> [LAUGHTER] HE GAVE ME THE CONTACT PERSON AT FLOCK. HE AND I WENT BACK AND FORTH FOR CHANGES, WE'LL GO WITH THAT. THE TYPICAL THING. WE GOT TO THIS POINT WHERE ALL THE OBJECTIONS I HAD TO THE ORIGINAL HAD BEEN REMOVED. >> JUST THAT EASY. >> SURE. >> YEAH, THAT'S IT. >> NOT A PROBLEM. >> I THINK BEING AIRED ON THE FRONT PAGE OF THE PAPER HELPED OUR CASE A LITTLE BIT. >> GOOD MORNING, ASSISTANT CHIEF ANDREA MITCHELL. >> MORNING. >> WE WOULD LIKE TO TAKE THE OPPORTUNITY TO TALK ON THIS TEAM TOO, HELP US GET THIS PROOF AND PUSH FORWARD. IT'S DEFINITELY GOING TO HELP OUR INVESTIGATIVE TEAM INCREASE THEIR PRODUCTIVITY. IT HELP SOLVE THOSE HARD CRIMES. >> VERY GOOD. YES, DAVID. >> I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S A QUESTION FOR THIS MORNING OR THIS EVENING BECAUSE I'M SURE WE'LL BE DISCUSSING THIS A LITTLE MORE BECAUSE I WANT THE PUBLIC TO BE REAL CLEAR ON WHAT IT IS WE'RE ADOPTING HERE. WE'RE NOT INSTALLING FLOCK CAMERAS WHERE WE'RE ACCESSING SYSTEMS THAT ARE ALREADY ON PRIVATE PROPERTY. THE CITY DOESN'T HAVE ANY FLOCK. >> ACCESSING THE DATA. >> ACCESSING THE DATA. THANK YOU. WHO ACCESSES THE DATA? I KNOW THIS GOES FROM AUTO CRIMES HAVE BEEN USING THIS DATA TO GREAT EFFECT. NOW THE FORCE IN GENERAL WILL HAPPEN. WILL AN OFFICER IN A CAR BE ABLE TO ACCESS THIS DATA ON THE FLY. IS THERE A REQUEST PROCESS? WHO ACCESSES THIS DATA NOW? >> WE'LL BE WORKING VERY HARD TO IMPLEMENT ALL POLICIES TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE'S NO ABUSE BY ANYBODY AT THE APARTMENT. THERE WILL BE POLICY IN PLACE BEFORE WE ALLOW ANYONE TO HAVE ACCESS TO IT. I DON'T KNOW SPECIFICALLY HOW THEY WILL GET ACCESS TO IT, BUT I'M QUITE SURE IT'S GOING TO BE THROUGH [OVERLAPPING]. >> BUT WHAT WILL IT BE FOR? I GUESS MY QUESTION IS THIS, POLICE ON THE STREET BEING ABLE TO DO THIS OR IS THIS PART OF AN INVESTIGATIVE UNIT PROCESS TO ACCESS THIS? >> IT SHOULD BE BOTH JUST DEPENDING ON IF IT'S A REAL-TIME CRIME THAT'S HAPPENING RIGHT AT THAT MOMENT, THE SUPERVISORS WILL HAVE THAT ACCESS. I THINK WE'LL HAVE IT VERY LIMITED, BUT WE HAVE NOT LOOKED AT ALL THE POLICIES AND THE BEST PRACTICES IN ORDER TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THAT. >> DO YOU ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON THAT, SIR? >> NOT ABOUT FLOCK, BUT MY NEXT ONE WOULD BE THE STEP GRANT, AND SO WHILE THE ASSISTANT CHIEF IS UP HERE. COULD YOU TELL ME JUST A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THAT? THE STEP PARENT IS SO THAT'S 11-D. I BELIEVE WE'RE GETTING SOME GRANT MONEY TOO FOR SPEEDING. >> IT IS A GRANT THAT WE GET EVERY YEAR THAT WE'LL APPLY FOR THAT HELPS INCREASE OUR PRODUCTIVITY AS FAR AS INCREASE IN OUR STREETS SAFETY UNIT TO HELP US CRASH DATA AND HELPED US IMPROVE THE SAFETY OF THE STREETS. >> WE'VE USED IT IN THE PAST TO PAY OVERTIME FOR [00:30:02] EXTRA OF DETAILS AND THINGS LIKE THAT AS WELL. >> YES. I KNOW WE STOOD UP PRETTY OR THERE'S A DWI CLASS FOR IT. >> WE CALL IT OUR TRAFFIC ENFORCEMENT UNIT. YES. >> DOES THAT UTILIZE SOME OF THESE FUNDS? >> SOME OF THE SAME OFFICERS WORK IN AND OUT OF THIS FUND. THIS FUND IS USED FOR USUALLY SPECIAL INITIATIVES AND RESEARCH AS HE SAID AND OVERTIME. >> ESPECIALLY EVENTS IS FOR US WHENEVER THE BUSY WEEKENDS WE TRIED TO BOOST MANPOWER ON THOSE BIG EVENTS WEEKENDS, SO WE USED STEP RAMP TO SUBSIDIZE. >> YOU'LL HAVE TO LET ME KNOW WHEN YOU SET UP THOSE SPEED TRAPS, SO I CAN AVOID THOSE AREAS. >> WE DON'T HAVE TO SPEAK [OVERLAPPING]. >> NOT AT ALL. >> [OVERLAPPING] WE HAVE SAFETY ISSUES. >> THAT'S RIGHT. >> SAFETY CHECK. >> THANK YOU, SIR [OVERLAPPING]. >> YOU'RE DOING A GREAT JOB. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. JOHN, ANYTHING ELSE? >> YEAH, ONE MORE 11-X. >> I DON'T KNOW IF I GOT THAT FAR. I KNOW I SAID WHEN WE GO TO THE AA. >> YEAH WE DO. >> WE DO NEED TO GO TO AA. >> AFTER THIS ONE. >> OH, A SELLER. >> 11-S, DID YOU SAY? >> OH X. >> [OVERLAPPING] HOPE TO TALK ABOUT A SELLER. >> OH, HOW ARE YOU? >> HOW ARE YOU? >> I'M GOOD. TELL ME ABOUT A SELLER. WE'RE DOING A TWO-YEAR MAINTENANCE CONTRACT. >> EXCUSE ME. HOW COULD YOU IDENTIFY YOURSELF? >> HOPING DIRECTOR IT. >> THANK YOU. TO YOUR MAINTENANCE AND SUPPORT AGREEMENT FOR A SELLER, OUR SELLER SOFTWARE. WE ARE FACING THIS SOFTWARE OUT. IS THAT CORRECT? >> INTERESTING QUESTION, THE VENDOR HAS TOLD US JUST RECENTLY THAT THEY ARE NO LONGER GOING TO SUPPORT OUR ON-PREMISE SOLUTION BEGINNING IN 2025. SO THE CITY HAS NO CHOICE. >> IS THIS THE NEW SYSTEM? >> NO. >> LET'S GO INTO THE CLOUD. >> WE HAVE A CHOICE. EFFECTIVELY, WE PRAY AND YOU MOVE TO THE CLOUD, OR WE GO OUT FOR AN RFP TO OUR NEW SYSTEM. >> OUR SELLER IS STILL AROUND. THEY'RE JUST GOING TO A CLOUD-BASED SOFTWARE INSTEAD OF WHAT WE HAVE SOME PHYSICAL SOFTWARE ON OUR SYSTEM NOW. >> THEY WANT TO SELL A 2.0. >>WE EITHER UPGRADE TO THE CLOUD OR GO UP. >> WE EITHER UPGRADE OR MOVE TO ANOTHER PLATFORM. >> I THOUGHT WE WERE LOOKING AT MOVING TO ANOTHER PLATFORM. I THOUGHT MAYBE. >> IT'S A PROJECT THAT'S BEEN SITTING ON THE BACK BURNER. I CAN'T DO TOO MUCH AT ONE TIME. WE WERE WORKING ON THE ERP SOFTWARE SYSTEM. WE'RE ALSO FIXING TO BE WORKING ON THE POLICE RMS AND CAD SYSTEM. THERE'S NO WAY THAT I CAN PUT THE PLANNING AND PERMITTING MODULE IN THERE NOW. I MEAN, THE UNFORTUNATE PROBLEM THAT I HAVE IS THEM COMING BACK AND SAYING I'M NO LONGER GOING TO SUPPORT YOU, PAST 2025 HAS PUT A LAYER OF MAJOR COMPLEXITY INTO THE SITUATION TO WHERE WE'RE GOING TO BE FORCED TO DO SOMETHING. SOONER THAN WHAT WE ANTICIPATED. >> WHEN WILL YOU KNOW WHICH DIRECTION WE'RE GOING TO GO ON THAT? >> I AM WAITING ON THE VENDOR OR SMART STACK. THEY ARE SUPPOSED TO HAVE ME A PROPOSAL TOMORROW OF WHAT IT WILL COST FOR THEM TO MIGRATE MY ON-PREM TO THEIR CLOUD-BASED SOLUTION AND THEN WHAT THAT COST WILL BE ON A REGULAR BASIS. BECAUSE YOU ARE MOVING TO A SUBSCRIPTION AND STUFF PERPETUAL. I THINK EVERYBODY KNOWS WHEN YOU CASH COW, IT'S SUBSCRIPTION-BASED SOFTWARE. >> EVEN THE NAVIGATION OF YOUR CAR NOW IS SUBSCRIPTION. >> YEAH, IT'S CRAZY. >> WE HAD MURRAY AND THEN MURRAY, DID YOU HAVE A QUESTION? >> HE JUST SAID WE'RE STILL LOOKING AT THE SYSTEM. IT'LL TAKE A LOT OF WORK AND I KNOW HOW LONG IT TAKES TO IMPLEMENT THOSE SYSTEMS. YOU'RE ALSO LOOKING AT THIS IS GOING TO HAVE THOSE IMPORTANT TWO YEARS. >> WE JUST FOUND OUT THEY WERE NO LONGER GOING TO SUPPORT IT. WE JUST RECEIVED NOTICE TWO WEEKS AGO THAT THEY WERE NO LONGER AT MY SUPPORT ON [INAUDIBLE]. THEY HAVE PUT THE CITY IN A PRETTY UNCOMFORTABLE POSITION TO BE HONEST WITH YOU, BECAUSE WE WERE ALL WORKING ON THE ERP. THERE'S NO WAY OR ELSE I'M GOING TO HAVE TO GET REALLY CREATIVE TO FIGURE OUT HOW I CAN START WORKING ON WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO WITH THIS SYSTEM. WHILE I'M WORKING ON NEW YORK [OVERLAPPING]. >> ONE OF THE STANCES WE'VE TAKEN IS, LET'S FIND OUT EXACTLY WHAT IT COSTS TO DO THE MIGRATION THAT THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT. THAT MAY BE AN INTERIM STEP OR IT MAYBE, DEPENDING ON WHAT IT IS, WE DON'T KNOW IF IT COSTS $1,000 OR $100,000. WE NEED TO GET THAT PROPOSAL FOR THEM AND SEE EXACTLY WHAT THAT IS AND WHAT UPGRADES AND THINGS IT BRINGS WITH IT. [00:35:01] >> YEAH, THAT'S WHAT I'M WAITING ON. I'M WAITING ON THEIR PROPOSAL. >> WE DON'T HAVE COMPLETE INFORMATION YET. >> YOU STARTED LOOKING AT THE OTHER SYSTEM MONTHS AGO. >> THE ERP PROJECT HAS BEEN THAT THE RFP WAS RELEASED IN JANUARY OF THIS PAST YEAR. WE ARE DOWN TO THE WIRE ON, WE PLAN ON BRINGING A RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL IN NOVEMBER AS OUR ANTICIPATION ON WHAT WE'RE GOING TO GO WITH. >> BUT THAT'S THE FINANCIAL SYSTEM. >> THAT'S THE FINANCIAL. >> ERP IS NOT ADDRESSING A SELLER. >> THAT'S CORRECT. SO WE SEPARATE IT. I THINK WHAT YOU'RE GOING AT IS [OVERLAPPING]. >> WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TWO NEW SYSTEMS TO BE IMPLEMENTING IF WE CAN'T MIGRATE THIS STUFF UP, BUT THEN WE STILL KNOW THERE IS A [INAUDIBLE]. >> I KNOW WHERE JOHN PAUL IS GOING WITH THIS. THE PORTAL IS A BIG ISSUE. WE KNOW THAT, AND WE'VE TALKED TO THEM. ONE OF THE ITEMS I'M ASKING THEM IS, WHAT INVESTMENT HAVE YOU MADE INTO YOUR PORTAL, BECAUSE FROM THE BACKEND PERSPECTIVE, SEEMS HERE, THEIR STAFF ARE SUFFICIENTLY PLEASED WITH THE BACKEND OF THE APPLICATION, THERE ARE NO ISSUES. IT'S THE FRONT-END THAT NEEDS A LOT OF TLC. THIS GENTLEMAN WORKS IN IT AND UNDERSTANDS AND CAN VERY MUCH RELATE TO THAT. THEY HAVE ADVISED ME THAT THEY HAVE A CUDO THAT THEY'VE RETROFITTED TO REPLACE AUGMENT, THE CURRENT PORTAL THAT WE HAVE FOR AN EXTRA FEE AND THAT'S MY CONCERN. [OVERLAPPING] WHY WOULD I PAY AN EXTRA FEE FOR A MORE MODERN AND INTUITIVE PORTAL. >> MIKE YOU HAD A QUESTION. >> EACH YEAR COSTS 120,000. >> AND IT'S PROJECTED TO GO UP WHEN YOU GO SUBSCRIPTION. >> PER YEAR. >> OH, ABSOLUTELY. >> [LAUGHTER] >> WHO WOULD SEND YOU IN THE WRONG BUSINESS? >> YEAH. [LAUGHTER] >> MY COSTS ARE SKYROCKETING ON THE SUBSCRIPTION BASIS. >> IS IT MY ASSUMPTION THAT IF WE MIGRATE TO BEYOND THE CLOUD, IT COULD BE OVER 250,000? >> [NOISE] THE PRELIMINARY CALLS THAT I'VE BEEN PROVIDED WITH- >> [INAUDIBLE] >> THE PRELIMINARY CALLS THAT I'VE BEEN PROVIDED IS JUST A SUBSCRIPTION ALONE, IT'S ABOUT $180,000 ANNUALLY TO START. >> THEN YOU STILL HAVE TO PAY HIM TO PUT EVERYTHING OVER. >> THEN YOU HAVE YOUR ONETIME FEES TO ACTUALLY TAKE AND PICK YOU UP, MOVE YOU AND DO THE IMPLEMENTATION. I HAVE SOME COST, AND WHEN I PROJECTED MY FY 25 BUDGET, I HAVE TO PROJECT OUT SO MANY YEARS FOR MY CAUSE. >> LET ME JUST WARN YOU, THESE ARE SMALL NUMBERS COMPARED TO WHAT YOUR POLICE RMS SYSTEM IS GOING TO TAKE. >> YEAH. I PROJECTED THAT WE WERE GOING TO BEGIN THAT PROJECT IN 2025, AND I PUT SOME MONEY IN MY CAPITAL FOR IT, IT'S NOT GOING TO BE ENOUGH BECAUSE NOW I'M HAVING TO GO COMPLETELY A DIFFERENT DIRECTION. YOU KNOW WHAT MEANS. >> HOW LONG HAVE THEY HAD THEIR CLOUD UP AND RUNNING? >> I DON'T KNOW. I DON'T HAVE A GOOD ANSWER FOR YOU, I CAN FIND OUT. WHEN THEY STARTED, WHEN THEY PUT THEIR CLOUD, I WILL TELL YOU THE COMPLEXITIES WITH THE CLOUD ARE THESE. WHEN YOU MOVE YOUR DATA TO THE CLOUD, YOU BETTER BE COMFORTABLE AND CONFIDENT THAT YOU PLAN TO STAY FOR A REALLY LONG PERIOD OF TIME. BECAUSE ONCE YOU GET YOUR DATA THERE, IT'S VERY DIFFICULT TO GET YOUR DATA BACK. AT LEAST HERE, I CONTROL MY DATA ON-PREM. IT PUTS YOU IN A DIFFERENT ENVIRONMENT AND THAT IS WHY IT'S SO IMPORTANT THAT YOU CROSS YOUR T'S, DOT YOUR I'S WHEN YOU SAY, I AM GOING TO MOVE TO THIS SOFTWARE APPLICATION, YOU HAVE TO KNOW IT'S LONG TERM BECAUSE YOU NO LONGER CONTROL THAT DATA. THEY CONTROL THEM. >> DAVID. >> I WILL POINT OUT THE FIRST ONE THERE ARE EFFICIENCIES WITH CLOUD-BASED SYSTEMS, AS OPPOSED TO THE BUY AT ONCE AND THEN MAINTAIN IT FOREVER. YOU DON'T HAVE THOSE MAINTENANCE COSTS WRITTEN INTO THAT. >> OR THE UPGRADE. >> YEAH, I HAVE SOME OF THE SAME IN MY BUSINESS AND OWNERSHIP OF THE DATA AND CONTROL THAT DATA IS ALWAYS, WHEN WE SAY CLOUD, WE MEAN SOMEBODY ELSE'S COMPUTER. >> SHARING. >> EXACTLY. >> WHICH MEANS THAT SOMEBODY ELSE HAS THAT. [00:40:01] BUT WHAT IS ALSO TRUE IS IF WE'RE UNHAPPY WITH THE FRONT-END AND YOU DON'T SEE A SOLUTION TO THAT AND OF COURSE THAT'S ONE OF THE THINGS I KNOW YOU'VE BEEN WORKING. >> I'VE HEARD WHAT HE SAID. >> YES, RIGHT- >> BEEN HEARING WHAT HE'S BEEN SAYING FOR A LONG TIME. >> HE'S BEEN SAYING IT FOR A LONG TIME. >> YEAH. >> BUT NO MATTER WHERE YOU GO, YOU'RE PROBABLY JUMPING TO ANOTHER SUBSCRIPTION CLOUD-BASED SYSTEM [OVERLAPPING] WHICH PROBABLY IS DEAD. >> AS LONG AS YOU KNOW IT, THE LANDSCAPE IS COMPLETELY DIFFERENT. >> YOU DON'T GO TO BEST BUY AND BUY A BOX OF SOFTWARE ANYMORE, YOU DON'T DO THAT. >> [OVERLAPPING] LIKE I SAID, EVEN YOUR IN-CAR TECHNOLOGIES ARE GOING TO SUBSCRIPTION. >> DAVID FINKLEA. DAVID. >> HELP ME UNDERSTAND. WHEN YOU STARTED TO DESCRIBE THIS TWO-YEAR AGREEMENT, I BELIEVE YOU SAID THAT IT WAS YOUR INTENT TO EVENTUALLY EITHER SEEK ANOTHER RFP FOR SIMILAR SERVICES DURING THAT PERIOD OF TIME, IS THAT CORRECT? >> I PROJECTED IN 2025 THAT WE WOULD BEGAN LOOKING AT EITHER A, APPLY TO THEIR CLOUD OR B, REPLACE THE SOFTWARE SYSTEM COLLECTIVELY. BUT WHEN I DID THAT, I DID NOT KNOW THAT THEY WERE GOING TO END UP SUPPORT THEIR ON-PREM, WHICH ACTUALLY PROVIDES A DIFFERENT SET OF URGENCY TO THIS SITUATION. >> THE ONLY REASON I ASKED THAT IS BECAUSE IN THE RENEWAL ORDER FORM, THERE'S NOT AN EARLY TERMINATION CLAUSE, AND THE PO AMOUNTS AND THE FULL AMOUNT FOR THE TWO YEARS. I WANTED TO ASK THAT BASED UPON WHATEVER YOUR PROJECT PLAN IS FOR 2025, IS THERE AN OPPORTUNITY TO DO THE RFP AND MAKE THE DETERMINATION OF WHETHER YOU'RE GOING TO STICK WITH A SELLER, OR MOVE TO A DIFFERENT PLATFORM WITHIN THIS TWO-YEAR CONTRACT? >> I THINK IT'S GOING TO BE HARD BECAUSE OF THE OTHER PROJECTS GOING ON. WE HAVE TO MAKE A DECISION BY THE END OF 2025. IT'S NOT LIKE THE SOFTWARE WOULDN'T BE USABLE, IT'S THAT YOU WOULD HAVE NO SUPPORT IN THE EVENT THAT THEY'RE PROPRIETARY SOFTWARE HAD A PROBLEM. NO UPGRADE, NO PURCHASE. >> UNDERSTOOD. >> THE TWO-YEAR IS IRONICALLY, I BRING TO COUNCIL EVERY YEAR AT THIS TIME, EITHER A ONE-YEAR OR A THREE, WE'VE BEEN GOING WITH THREE YEARS LAST YEAR, WE WENT WITH A ONE YEAR. THIS YEAR THEY WOULD WANT TO ASK THEM FOR THE THREE-YEAR AGREEMENT, THEY WOULD NOT GIVE ME A THREE-YEAR. THEY WOULD ONLY GIVE ME A TWO-YEAR AND THEN A WEEK LATER THEY CAME BACK AND I SAID, WELL, THAT MAKES SENSE, THAT'S WHERE MY TWO-YEAR COMES FROM. >> PLANNED OBSOLESCENCE IS A BIG DEAL WITH THE SOFTWARE. >> THERE'S NO DOUBT. >> DAVID ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? >> JOHN. >> THAT'S ALL I HAVE FOR THAT ONE. >> THANK YOU. >> FOR MORE, ANYBODY ELSE GOT ANYTHING? I'M RUNNING FROM THE OTHER ROOM, SO ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. MY NEXT ONE WOULD BE 11 J, THE FIRE TRUCK. THIS IS OUR BIG LADDER TRUCK? >> NO. LADDER 4. >> THIS IS THE [INAUDIBLE] >> THIS IS THE ONE AT STATION 4. >>THE EXISTING TOWER. [OVERLAPPING]. >> THIS IS NOT A TOWER, IT'S A LADDER. >> THIS IS A 2010 TRUCK? WE'VE HAD THIS TRUCK THAT LONG? >> WE DIDN'T GET IT IN 2010. IT WAS A DEMO TRUCK THAT WE GOT A GOOD DEAL ON, AND WE BOUGHT IT. IT WAS ALREADY A YEAR OLD OR SO WE BOUGHT IT. >> BUT IT HAD NO MILES ON. [OVERLAPPING]. >> GOT IT FOR A WHILE THEN? >> BUT THESE TRUCKS HAVE 20 PLUS YEAR LIVES. >> THAT'S ALL I GOT ON THAT ONE. THANK YOU, DAVID. >> I'LL TAKE THIS OPPORTUNITY TO TELL YOU AT FOUR O'CLOCK TODAY, OUR THIRD LADDER, THE FIRST TIME GALVESTON HAS EVER HAD A THIRD LETTER APPARATUS WILL BE HERE AT FOUR O'CLOCK OUT IN THE PARKING LOT ALONG WITH ONE OF OUR NEW BATTALION CHIEF VEHICLES FOR YOU GUYS TO SEE. >> IS THAT WHY THEY CAN'T WAIT TO CLIMB THE LADDER. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? >> I AM DONE WITH MY QUESTIONS. >> GOOD, DAVID. >> I DO HAVE A COUPLE. 11 E FAR RUNS INTO THE COUNTY. I DON'T THINK I UNDERSTAND WHAT THIS IS EXACTLY. >> I HAVE QUESTION. >> THIS IS THE COUNTY FOR YEARS HAS FUNDED ALL THE FIRE DEPARTMENTS IN GALVESTON, AND THIS IS WHAT WE USED TO CALL THE RUN FUND AND IT'S BASED ON THE NUMBER OF RUNS AND THEY THE ALLOCATED THAT WAY. >> CHIEF SITING BACK OR SOMEPLACE. >> WE GET A LITTLE SMALL PIECE OF THIS. I LOOK AT IT FROM THIS PERSPECTIVE, WE PROVIDE A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF MUTUAL AID OFF THE ISLAND. THIS IS WHY THE COUNTY DOES THIS, IT'S PART OF THEIR VOLUNTEER FIREFIGHTER, BECAUSE IN ESSENCE, YOU HAVE SOME CITIES OUTSIDE OF GALVESTON THAT MOST HAVE VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENTS. SO BY PROXY, WE END UP FIGHTING A LOT OF FIRES OFF THE ISLAND. >> IS THIS ALSO COVER UNINCORPORATED PARTS OF THE COUNTY THAT ARE ON THE ISLAND. [00:45:06] >> WE HAVE NO UNINCORPORATED AREAS ON THE ISLAND. >. WE DO WITH THESE PARKS AND WHATNOT. >> THIS IS STILL INCORPORATED IN THIS JOB. >> THEY'RE ALL STILL INCORPORATED. >> THERE ARE A FEW THAT AREN'T FUSED AT THE END OF THE ISLANDS AND WAY PASSES. >> THEY'RE ON OUR CITY LIMITS. >> BUT IT'S COUNTY. >> IT COVERS COUNTY OWNED PROPERTIES, BUT IF ANY PROPERTY THAT'S LOCATED IN OUR CITY LIMITS, WE WOULD FIGHT A FIRE ON. >> YES, WE'VE HAD JONAS AT THE TABLE. IF YOU COULD INTRODUCE YOURSELF. ALSO OUR CHIEF OF THE FIRE. [OVERLAPPING] >> IT HAS BEEN A GOOD PROGRAM WE'VE BEEN PARTICIPATING IN FOR YEARS. THEY CALL US, WHEN THEY BACK-UP US, WE BACKUP THEM WHEN NEEDED ON THE MAINLAND. THE COUNTY DOES SUPPLEMENTS SMALL GRANT TO COVER ANY EXPENSES THAT WE HAVE. >> DAVID. >> CHIEF AUSTIN, DO YOU HAVE ANY METRICS ON HOW MANY FIREARMS YOU HAD TO PARTICIPATE IN AS A PART OF THIS? >> IT WAS ABOUT 15-20. IT AVERAGES ANNUALLY, THIS YEAR I THINK WE DID 17. >> THERE'S A RECIPROCATION PIECE ON THAT TOO. WHEN WE HAVE A MAJOR FIRE, THEY'LL COME IN AND BACK INTO OUR STATIONS AND RUN MEDICAL AND THINGS LIKE THAT FOR US WHILE WE'RE FIGHTING A MAJOR FIRE. >> LAST YEAR, WE HAD SEVERAL. >> DO WE HAVE ANY INBOUND NUMBERS ON THAT? >> I DON'T HAVE IT HANDEDLY. I CAN GET THEM TO YOU, BUT WE RECEIVE JUST ABOUT THE SAME AS WE ASSIST OUT. >> A GOOD EXAMPLE IS WHEN WE HAVE A BIG WAREHOUSE FIRE LAST YEAR, WE HAD JAMAICA BEACH AND OTHERS COME IN. THEY HELPED US FIGHT THE FIRE IN LAKE CITY. >> SURE. WELL CHIEF AUSTIN THANK YOU FOR SHARING. >> PART OF THIS TOO IS THAT THE COUNTY REALIZED THAT I'M GOING BACK TO PREVIOUS CAREER, BUT THE COUNTY REALIZED LONG TIME AGO IT'S IMPOSSIBLE FOR ANY FIRE DEPARTMENT TO HAVE 100% OF THE APPARATUS THEY WOULD NEED FOR A MAJOR CONFLAGRATION, SO THEY UNDERSTAND THE NEED FOR MUTUAL AID. >> DAVID ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? >> I DON'T HAVE. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU CHIEF, I APPRECIATE IT. >> I'M JUST GOING TO TOSS THIS OUT THERE BECAUSE I ASKED THIS QUESTION ABOUT PAINT. I'M GOING TO ASK YOU ABOUT GLASS AT THE FIRE HAD AT THE AIRPORT. WE'RE REPLACING [OVERLAPPING]. >> WHAT WITH ITEM? >> OH, I'M SORRY. 11 G. >> 11 G. >> WE'RE REPLACING THE GLASS IN THE TOWER. I MIGHT LIKE SHOW OR AIRPORT DIRECTOR IS BACK WITH US $633,000 REPLACEMENT. >> IT'S BECAUSE WE'RE TRANSPARENT. [LAUGHTER]. >> YOU GAVE ME A PRETTY GOOD EXPLANATION RISE. WHERE'S THE $2 MILLION OF PAINT? >> WE'RE ALSO REPLACING THE FRAMES AND THAT'S WHAT THE ROOT CAUSE OF THE PROBLEM IS THE WINDOW FRAMES WERE STEEL, AND THEY'RE JUST PRESSURE ON THE SOUTH SIDE THEY'RE CORRODING, WE'LL REPLACE THEM WITH MARINE GRADE STAINLESS STEEL. >>IF YOU GO OUT THERE, I TOOK A TOUR IN MY ACADEMY OUT THERE. WHEN YOU GO OUT THERE, IT'S WELL-WORTH THE $633,000. THE FRAMES, IT'S QUITE A MESS. [OVERLAPPING]. >> WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO COME VISIT YOU THEN. >> WE STILL REPAIR AS NEEDED. THAT'LL REPLACE 55 FOOT AND THE 71 FEET TALL, SO WE DON'T ANTICIPATE NEEDING ALL OF THAT. LIKELY IT'LL BE UNDER THE 600,000, WHICH WILL BE 100% PAID FOR BY THE FA. >> I WOULD ASSUME THAT'S IMPACT GLASS. >> YES, HURRICANE GLASS. >> ANYTHING ELSE, DAVID? >> I DON'T THINK SO. >> THANK YOU, MIKE. >> THANKS MIKE. >> REAL QUICK. >> WHAT ITEM WAS THAT ON? >> THAT WAS 11 G. >> 11 G. >> COOL. SOMETIMES I SAY I THINK COSTS ARE TOO HIGH AND SOMETIMES 11N, THIS AGREEMENT WITH DFI TRANSFER. WHAT IS $4,200 FOR? FOUR MILLION DOLLARS INVESTED. >> I GOT COUNCIL MEMBER, THAT'S A FIVE-YEAR CONTRACT AND WE'RE ESTIMATING THAT BASED ON HISTORICAL TIMES. >> WHAT THIS IS, IS OUR TRANSPORT FROM OUR TRANSFER STATION TO THE COUNTY FACILITY. >> FROM OUR TRANSFER STATION, ALL THE ISLANDS THAT ARE PUSHED THROUGH THAT FACILITY THAT GO INTO THE LANDFILL. IT'S BASICALLY THE DROP IN THE RIVER. >> IN THE GENERAL PUBLIC WE DO NOT HAVE A DUMP. EVERYTHING WE HAVE GETS DROPPED ON A WAREHOUSE FLOOR. YOU SCOOPED UP PUTTING A TRUCK AND HAULED OFF THE EYE ALL THE WAY SOMEPLACE ELSE AND IT SAVES PEOPLE A LOT OF A LOT OF TRIPS INTO THE COUNTY WOULD DO WITH THAT. >> ALL GALVESTON PEOPLE STILL CALL IT THE DUMP AND I GUESS IT TECHNICALLY IS, BUT IT'S NOT A DUMB. >> THIS IS AN ANNUAL COST? >> THE FOUR MILLION PLUSES FOR REPORTING OVER THE FIVE-YEAR PERIOD. >> THAT'S A FINE. THAT'S GOOD TO KNOW. THANK YOU. REAL QUICK, AS LONG AS YOU'RE HERE DOES 110 THE AUTOMATED ROLLOUT, [00:50:07] GARBAGE CANS. WHAT'S THAT? >> THOSE ARE JUST THE COURTS THAT WE PUT INTO SERVICE. THIS IS REPLACEMENT EQUIPMENT FOR STUFF THAT EITHER GETS DAMAGED. >> THE CANS NOT AUTOMATED THE TRUCK IS. [OVERLAPPING] >> THE WAY IT READS. >> I WILL CHANGE THAT ON THE NEXT ONE. >> YOU GOT AUTOMATED CANS. I'M OKAY WITH THAT. I JUST DIDN'T [OVERLAPPING]. >> ASK IF THE GRABS GOT WI-FI. [LAUGHTER]. >> THIS IS THE NEW ROLLOUTS FOR YOUR AUTOMATIC? >> THESE ARE SUPPLEMENTAL INVENTORY. >> BUT WE'RE CHANGING CANS? >> WE'RE CHANGING THE PROFILE OF CANS? >> SHORT STUBBY CANS DON'T FLIP OVER EASY. >> WE'VE BEEN USING AUTO FOR PRIOR TO MY ARRIVAL. >> ARE WE SYSTEMATICALLY REPLACING THE CANS? THIS IS JUST WHAT THE NEW ONES ARE. >> IT'S A COMBINATION OF BOTH. CANS GET DAMAGED AND PEOPLE REQUESTING AN EXTRA CAN AND THEN JUST GENERAL CAN REPLACEMENT IS WHERE WE ARE AT. >> AS WE GO FORWARD, WE'RE USING THE STUBBY MORE STABLE. IT WAS LABELED CAT WE'VE BEEN USING BECAUSE WHEN YOU LEAVE IN THE ALLEY AND A STORM HITS, YOU GO DOWN TO YOUR NEIGHBOR'S HOUSE TRYING TO FIND YOUR CAN I HAVE THAT EXPERIENCE. >> ARE THE NEW CANS THE SAME SIZE? >> THEY'RE THE SAME VOLUME. >> VOLUME? >> THEY JUST HAVE A LITTLE CONFIGURATION. >> THEY LOOK FUNNY. >> I USED TO WORK FOR A COMPANY FOR ABOUT A YEAR. YOU'D GET THAT TIP EITHER TALL AND THEN IT'S JUST A MATTER OF PREFERENCE [OVERLAPPING]. >> THE OLDER CANS HAD A REAL NARROW THROAT AT THE BOTTOM AND STUFF WOULD GET WEDGED IN THE BOTTOM WHERE THE NEW ONES ARE MORE SQUARE AND BLOCKY SO THINGS DON'T GET STUCK IN. >> IT HAS TO BE LESS LIKELY TO FALL DOWN WHEN THEY PUT THEM. >> A LITTLE MORE STABLE. >> A LOT HAPPENS. >> DAVID, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? >> THAT'S ALL I HAVE. >> THANK YOU. >> ELEVEN S THIS LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE AND GRASP MOWING FOR BEACH TOWN LAWN SERVICES. WHAT ARE THEY? >> THEY ARE MOWING ALL OF OUR LIFT STATIONS. WE HAVE PUBLIC WORKS LOCATIONS LIKE WHERE OUR WATER TOWERS ARE AND THINGS LIKE THAT. >> THIS IS NOT ANY STAND BEHIND YOU? >> YEAH. >> LOOK OUT FOR YOURSELF. >> IF YOU WOULDN'T MIND TRAINING. >> IF IT DRIES UP PUBLIC WORKS, UTILITIES HAVE A SEAT. >> VERY QUICK QUESTION BUT WE'RE NOT REPLACING LIKE THE BROADWAY MAINTENANCE STUFF LIKE THAT. >> NO. THIS IS A SEPARATE CONTRACT MORE OF PUBLIC WORK STUFF. >> WEED EATING GRASS, CUTTING, THAT TYPE OF STUFF. THIS IS THROUGHOUT THE ISLAND. AT ALL OF THE LIFT STATIONS, AT THE ELEVATED STORAGE TANKS, THE PUMP STATIONS, AND THEN ON THE WELL SITES OVER THE BRIDGE. >> WHY DO WE CONTRACT OUT THE SERVICE AND NOT OTHER MOWING SERVICES? WHY WE SELF-PERFORM SOME AND THEN WE CONTRACT OUT SOMETHING LIKE THIS? >> I THINK ANOTHER QUESTION ADDED TO THAT AS WHY WOULDN'T WE CONTRACT TO OUR PARKS DEPARTMENT THAT WE'D GIVE THEM MORE FUNDS? >> BECAUSE IT'S PROBABLY CHEAPER. >> IT'S PROBABLY THIS, BUT THESE DON'T [OVERLAPPING] >> THAT'S THE HEART OF MY QUESTION. IS THERE A SAVINGS HERE CONTRACTING OUT SOME OF THIS OTHER WORK? >> THERE IS, THERE IS TO SOME DEGREE AND WE LOOK AT THAT, THAT'S LIKE WE CONTRACT OUT THE MEDIAN WORK ON BROADWAY. >> WE MOW OUR OWN BALL FIELDS TO LIFE. >> I WOULD TELL YOU OUR LEVEL OF SERVICE AT THE PARKS IS A LITTLE BIT HIGHER THAN PROBABLY WHAT WE WOULD GET [OVERLAPPING]. >> ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS ON THAT? THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> I SEE ROB'S BACK IN THE ROOM. >> I KNOW THIS MAY BE TRUE AS WELL BECAUSE THE BADGER METERS. >> I CAN ON THAT. >> WHAT ELSE? >> THAT'D BE MUTUAL FIRM OR. >> A PAYER. >> ELEVEN U. >> THIS IS A CHANGE ORDER TO BADGER METER. DOES JUST INCREASED COST OF THESE METERS AS WE KNOW? >> DURING THE TIME THAT WE WERE GOING THROUGH THE BIDDING PROCESS AND GOING THROUGH THE CONTRACT NEGOTIATIONS. THEN SHORTLY AFTER THE CONTRACT NEGOTIATIONS, WE WERE STILL INSTALLING THE OLDER STYLE MECHANICAL METERS, BRAND-NEW, BUT WE WERE STILL INSTALLING THEM ALL IN. DURING THAT TIME PERIOD, WE INSTALLED 1,400 METERS THROUGH GROWTH TAPS, DEVELOPMENTS THAT ALREADY HAD TAPS ALREADY IN PLACE, RENEWALS, THINGS OF THAT NATURE. WHAT WE'VE DONE IS WE'VE GONE BACK AND WE'VE EXAMINED WITH THE HELP OF HOPE, WE'VE EXAMINED HOW MANY METERS WERE INSTALLED AND WHAT THE DELTA WAS. IT WAS AT 1411 METERS. WE HAVE A CHOICE AND THE CHOICE IS EITHER REPLACE THOSE METERS ENTIRELY WITH THE NEW SYSTEM, BUT THEY'RE BRAND NEW METERS THAT HAVE 15-20-YEAR LIFESPAN, OR RETROFIT THEM SO THAT THEY CAN BE READ BY THE AMI SYSTEM AND CUSTOMERS CAN STILL SEE THEM, BUT YOU DO LOSE SOME FUNCTIONALITY LIKE THE DOMESTIC METERS THAT WERE INSTALLED WON'T HAVE THE REMOTE CONNECT DISCONNECT. [00:55:05] BOTH CHOICES ARE IN THERE, BUT THAT'S WHAT THIS REPRESENTS. >> WELL, WHICH IS THE MORE EFFICIENT WAY TO GO ABOUT THIS. YOU REALIZE YOU DID INSTALL THOSE METERS DURING THAT TRANSITION PHASE, BUT YOU COULDN'T SUSPEND SERVICES 12-18 MONTHS, ESPECIALLY DURING COVID AND ALL THAT STUFF. SO I UNDERSTAND WHY YOU DID IT THAT WAY. BUT DO WE DO WE NEED TO JUST BITE THE BULLET AND GO TO THE NEW ONES NOW AND STANDARDIZE THE SYSTEM COMPLETELY. OR I MEAN BECAUSE TEN YEARS FROM NOW, OR ARE WE GOING TO STILL BE LIMPING ALONG WITH NOT QUITE FUNCTIONAL. >> YES, WE EXAMINED THAT BRANDON AND I SPOKE OFTEN ON IT AS WE WENT BACK AND FORTH. IF WE DO A COMPLETE SWAP OF THE REMAINING METERS, IT'S ABOUT $976,000. IF WE RETROFITTED, IT'S APPROXIMATELY 500 AND CHANGE. IF YOU HAVE A RETROFITTED METER, FOR EXAMPLE, IF YOU'RE ON A FIVE-METER AS A CUSTOMER, YOU WILL STILL BE ABLE TO SEE IT ON THE APP. YOU'LL STILL BE ABLE TO GET YOUR INTERVAL READS. WE WILL STILL BE ABLE TO PICK UP IF YOU HAVE AN INTERNAL LEAK. WHAT YOU WON'T HAVE IS OUR ABILITY TO DISCONNECT YOUR METER SHOULDN'T NEED TO BE DONE. THAT WOULD BE ON ABOUT 1,200 METERS ON THE ISLAND. >> THEY'RE NOT LIKE NOBODY EVER ASKED YOU GET ON THE STREET AGAIN. BUT TEN YEARS FROM NOW WE'RE GOING TO DO THIS ANYWAY. >> THESE METERS UNLESS THEY FELL, THEY HAVE A 15-20-YEAR LIFESPAN AND THEY'RE ANYWHERE FROM SIX MONTHS TO TWO YEARS IN. THE REALITY PROBABLY BE MORE LIKE 15 YEARS FROM NOW. WE'D HAVE TO DO THIS AGAIN FOR THOSE PARTICULAR METERS. >> WE HAVE MARIE AND THEN JOHN. >> MY QUESTION WOULD BE, WHERE ARE THESE BEATERS LOCATED? IS IT IN A EASIER PART TO SHUT OFF WATER MANUALLY OR A MORE DIFFICULT PART? >> PROBABLY TIP TO TIP NORTH TO SOUTH. >> WE HAVE NO IDEA. >> WE HAVE BUT THEY'RE SPREAD. >> WE KNOW WHAT AREAS WE HAVE MORE DIFFICULTIES IN THE PHRASE VERSUS THE AREA WITH ARE QUITE A FEW OF THESE WEST, I CAN TELL YOU THAT. >> WOULD THERE BE A WAY TO LOOK AT THAT BECAUSE IT MIGHT MAKE SENSE TO REPLACE SOME OF THE METERS IN MORE DIFFICULT AREAS VERSUS EASIER AREAS? >> YES, WE CAN PLOT IT OUT ON A MAP AND WE CAN TRY TO EXAMINE WHERE IT WOULD MAKE SENSE. >> BECAUSE I THINK THAT WOULD BE A GOOD EXERCISE TO DO BECAUSE. >> LOOK BACK WHERE THE WATER WAS LOST. >> EXACTLY. >> I WOULD TELL YOU MY DRUTHERS WOULD BE TO REPLACE THE METERS. >> I WILL TOO ADVERB PLACE. >> HAVE DAVID PUT THESE ON GOV DEALS AND TRY TO [OVERLAPPING] WE CAN GO THAT ROUTE AND WE HAD THAT AS AN OPTION IN THE STAFF REPORT. IF COUNCIL MANAGEMENT WOULD PREFER THAT, I'M HAPPY TO DO THAT. >> BECAUSE YOUR SUCCESSOR, 10, 12, 14 YEARS MILES AWAY. WHAT ARE THEY THINKING? >> THAT'S TRUE. >> BUT IT SEEMS REASONABLE NOW, BUT I WONDER IF IT'S REASONABLE IN TEN YEARS. IF WE DON'T NEED TO BITE THE BULLET AND DO THIS, SO THIS ADDITIONAL 570,000 OR $900,000 COST. WHAT IS THE SOURCE OF THAT? >> THAT IS COMING FROM OUR 2022 BOND ISSUANCE. THAT DIFFERENCE. >> BUT THIS IS BECAUSE THE ORIGINAL 16 SOMETHING CAME FROM. >> FROM A GRANT. >> A GRANT SO BOTH THESE INCREMENTS, WE'RE HAVING TO REVENUE FOOT THE BILL? >> YES. >> THE OTHER CONCERN WITH NOT REPLACING THEM NOW IS WE JUST WENT THROUGH A LENGTHY DISCUSSION ABOUT TECHNOLOGY AGING AND IN TEN YEARS FROM NOW. >> ALL THESE METERS ARE GOING TO BE IN THE CLOUD. >> WE'RE GOING TO BE GOING THROUGH IT'S GOING TO BE TRYING TO MATCH IT UP AND FINDING ONE THAT WORKS WITH OUR SYSTEM AND EVERYTHING ELSE. I THINK IT'S BETTER TO MIGRATE ALL AT ONE TIME. >> I AGREE. >> IF WE MIGRATE. >> WE'D LIKE TO GIVE YOU GUYS THE OPTIONS. >> DAVID, DID YOU HAVE YOUR HAND UP? >> BEFORE DAVID, IF WE MIGRATE TO THE NEW SYSTEM NOW WE'RE MOVING TO 976,000. IS THAT RIGHT? >> YES, SIR. >> IF WE VOTE IN THAT DIRECTION, IF WE APPROVE THAT, WE HAVE WE CAN MOVE FORWARD WITH THAT NOW? >> YES SIR. WE'RE READY TO GO. >> DAVID FINKLEA? >> YES. COULD YOU HELP ME BRIDGE THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ITEM 11T AND 11Q? 11Q STATES THAT IT'S A SOLE SOURCE FOR $220,000 FOR THE BADGER SYSTEM AND THEN YOU'VE GOT TO CHANGE ORDER REQUEST IN 11U. IS THE $220,000 IN ADDITION TO THE NEW TOTAL OF $16.434 MILLION THAT'S STATED ON 11U? >> NO, SIR. 11P IS OUR ANNUAL INVENTORY FOR GROWTH AND SO WE'VE ANTICIPATED A CERTAIN NUMBER OF METERS BEING INSTALLED [01:00:02] BASED ON OUR HISTORICAL TAPS THAT COME IN, NEW SERVICES THAT COME IN AND SO THIS IS FOR OUR STAFF TO ALREADY PURCHASE THAT FOR OUR INVENTORY. 11U IS SPECIFIC TO THE AMI PROJECT AND THE METER CHANGE OUT. >> VERY GOOD. THANK YOU. APPRECIATE IT. >> JOHN. >> I'M GLAD WE'VE GOT DAVID ASKED THAT QUESTION. WE ONLY HAVE ABOUT $220,000 BUDGET FOR GROWTH? >> THAT'S WHAT WE CAPTURED. WHAT WE DID WAS WE LOOKED AT THE NUMBER OF TAPS THAT WE'VE BEEN SEEING IN THE LAST FEW YEARS AND THEN WE JUST MULTIPLY THAT OUT BY THE COST OF THE METER. >> WHAT'S THE TIME PERIOD OF THE 1,400 METERS THAT WERE INSTALLED? >> THAT TIME PERIOD WAS OVER 2021 TO SOMEWHERE IN THE MIDDLE OF 2022. BUT DURING THAT TIME WE ALSO WERE REALLY BEING IMPACTED BY GROWTH THAT THE MARKET WAS REALLY HOT. THAT WAS RIGHT BEFORE ALL THE INFLATION STARTED GOING UP AND IT SLOWED DOWN. >> I'D ALSO SAY THAT A LOT OF THAT NUMBER THAT TRINA USED IS THERE WERE A LOT OF TAP RENEWALS, THERE ARE A LOT OF PROPERTIES THAT HAD SAT VACANT AND THE TAPS WENT BAD SO WE HAD TO REPLACE THE TAPS. WITH THE METER REPLACEMENT PROJECT A LOT OF THOSE TAPS ARE GETTING REDONE NOW SO I REALLY THINK THAT THIS NUMBER IS ACTUALLY GOING TO BE A LITTLE BIT LOWER AS WELL. >> THAT'S A BIT DIFFERENT THOUGH. YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT 12-1,400 METERS. IT LOOKS LIKE TO REPLACE THE 1,400 METERS IT'S GOING TO COST US $900,000. >> A LOT OF THOSE ARE COMMERCIAL. >> WHAT THE DIFFERENCE IS IN THAT 900,000, THAT'S ALSO THE CONTRACTOR GOING OUT THERE INSTALLING IT, REPLACING THE BOX, CLEANING IT OUT, GETTING NEW GPS POINTS, DOING THE INVENTORY FOR THE NEW LEAD AND COPPER RUINED TESTS BUT NEEDS TO HAPPEN. >> BUT THOSE ARE BRAND NEW METERS? >> YES. BUT THEY STILL HAVE TO CAPTURE ALL THAT INFORMATION AND THEY STILL HAVE TO SWAP OUT IF IT NEEDS TO HAPPEN. WELL, THE 11P THAT'S BEING PAID FOR WITH THE TAP FEES. WHEN A CUSTOMER COMES IN AND THEY PURCHASE A TAP AS THOSE COME ALONG THROUGHOUT THE YEAR WE'LL BE BUYING JUST ENOUGH SUPPLY TO KEEP IT GOING. >> WE HAVE MARIE AND MIKE. GO AHEAD, JOHN. >> GOING BACK TO YOU. >> ME? [LAUGHTER] >> HOW MUCH DO YOU THINK WE CAN SELL THE METERS FOR? >> I MIGHT HAVE TO LEAN ON DUSTIN. DUSTIN, DO YOU KNOW HOW MUCH RECYCLING WAS? >> NO. NOT OF THE TOP OF MY HEAD TO BE HONEST. I NEED TO FIND OUT THAT [OVERLAPPING] >> I'M TALKING ABOUT PUTTING THEM ON GOOD DEALS AND STUFF. [BACKGROUND] WE'D HAVE TO LOOK INTO THAT BUT I'D LIKE TO TRY TO SELL THEM. >> HOW MUCH DID WE PAY PER METER? >> [OVERLAPPING] THE OLD $202. >> TWO HUNDRED. >> MAYBE WE CAN HAVE THAT BACK? >> PROBABLY. ONE THING WE DO HAVE IN OUR FAVOR IN DOING THAT IS THERE ARE A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT NEED METERS RIGHT NOW. METERS ARE IN DEMAND. THEY'RE HAVING SUPPLY CHAIN ISSUES. >> MUCH LIKE A SELLER, THOSE OLD METERS ARE NOT NECESSARILY BEING SUPPORTED SO THEY'RE OUT THERE AND PEOPLE NEED THEM. >> WE HAVE MARIE AND MIKE. MARIE. >> GO FOR IT. >> TALK TO P SINCE WE JUMPED TO THAT. FOR A NEW DEVELOPMENT SO I THINK THAT NUMBER COULD BE LOW. BECAUSE SO MANY PROJECTS THAT WERE TABLED ARE ALL OF A SUDDEN COMING BACK ALIVE BECAUSE THE INVENTORY ISSUES HAVE LIGHTENED THEM WHATNOT. >> THAT'S 1,000 METERS, RIGHT? >> APPROXIMATELY. >> APPEARING SIZES. >> I THINK IT COULD BE LOW. >> IT JUST DEPENDS ON THIS. BUT YOU GOT TO REMEMBER TOO WE GET TAP FEES SO IF IT'S A LARGE DEVELOPMENT WE KNOW IT'S COMING WE CAN BUY THE METERS AT THAT TIME. THIS IS JUST HOW MUCH WE WANT TO KEEP ON HAND, IT'S NOT NECESSARILY THE TOTAL AMOUNT THAT WE WOULD BUY IN A YEAR IT'S JUST SO WE DON'T HAVE TO TELL A CUSTOMER THEY HAVE TO WAIT. >> WELL, WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO SHARE IS ALSO WHEN A NEW DEVELOPMENT COMES IN THEY PROVIDE ENGINEERING WITH THEIR DESIGNS. PART OF THEIR PROJECT FOR GETTING THE LAND READY FOR BUILD IS THEY PERFORM THEIR OWN TAPS AND THEY BUY THE METERS. THIS IS FOR PEOPLE COMING TO THE CITY TO GO AND INSTALL A TAP ON AN INDIVIDUAL BASIS. >> THIS IS A LOT OF INFILL. >> IN PART P I HAD TO ADD ON QUESTION BECAUSE THIS WAS WHAT AN ITEMS I HAD TOO. WHERE ARE WE ON THE METER? >> YOU KNOW WHAT? [BACKGROUND] [NOISE] >> FINALLY. >> IT'S AROUND. >> RIGHT NOW THEY'RE CURRENTLY AT PIRATES COVE. THAT'S WHERE THEY'RE AT PHYSICALLY RIGHT NOW. [LAUGHTER] WE CAN GET ONE TO BRIAN MAXWELL. [01:05:06] >> DO YOU MIND TO CANCEL ON THINGS AT SOME POINT? >> WE'VE INSTALLED JUST OVER 9,000 METERS. WE HAVE 4,000 IN STOCK. IF YOU RECALL THERE WAS A POINT WHERE WE WERE SLOWED BECAUSE OF SUPPLY CHAIN ISSUES. IT'S FORCED US TO JUMP AROUND AND INSTALL WITH THE SUPPLY THAT WE HAVE HAD. BADGER NOW IS BEEN GIVING US ABOUT 350 METERS PER WEEK AND AT ONE POINT THEY SHIPPED US A LARGE AMOUNT OF METERS TO GIVE US A BOOST. WE HAVE ABOUT 4,000 METERS IN STOCK. WE'VE INSTALLED OVER 9,000 METERS AND NOW THAT WE HAVE INVENTORY OUR INSTALLER HAS RAMPED UP THE AMOUNT OF STAFF THAT THEY HAVE. THAT RIGHT NOW THEY'RE AVERAGING ABOUT 350 METER INSTALLS PER WEEK [NOISE] BUT THEY ANTICIPATE GETTING UP TO ABOUT 550 PER WEEK. IF NOT THIS WEEK BY NEXT. IT SHOULD BEGIN TO PROGRESS RAPIDLY. >> THAT'S BETTER FASTER YOU CAN PUT THEM IN. IT'S NOT A PILING UP IN THE WAREHOUSE BUT THEY'RE NOT LEAVING YOU SHORT. THEY'VE BEEN A PART OF YOUR PARTNER. >> A HUNDRED METERS A WEEK. >> MIKE YOU HAD A QUESTION ALSO. >> ON P YOU WERE SAYING THAT YOU WERE GOING TO BUY METERS FOR INVENTORY. ARE THESE THE RETROFITTED OR THE NEW METERS? >> THESE ARE NEW METERS. >> THE NEW METERS. THE METERS THAT YOU'RE GOING TO PULL OUT IF WE APPROVE THE ONES FOR THE HIGH-TECH METERS, DOES BADGER HAVE A PROGRAM TO BUY THOSE BACK AND RECONDITION THOSE? >> THEY DO NOT. >> OKAY. >> THEY DON'T WANT THEM ANYMORE THERE. >> I DIDN'T KNOW IF THE BODIES WERE STILL GOOD AND THEY CAN JUST RETROFIT THEM OR HOW THAT WENT. >> THAT'S WHY I THINK THERE'S PROBABLY A MARKET FOR THEM. >> OKAY. >> ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS ON THIS ONE? >> THEY'RE GOING TO BE A BUNCH OF DIFFERENT SIZES TOO. >> I HAVE NOTHING FURTHER ON THIS AND THAT IS ALL MY QUESTIONS. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. TRINA. >> THANK YOU. >> SHARON. >> NO, I'M FINE. >> ANY QUESTIONS? >> NO. >> MIKE? >> NO. I THINK EVERYBODY WAS PRETTY COOL. I'M SURE MARIE IS GOING TO HAVE THE FOLLOW-UP AND WE WENT THROUGH EVERYTHING. >> MARIE, CAN YOU PLEASE? >> THANK YOU GUYS FOR COVERING ALL MY OTHER ONES. >> NO PROBLEM. >> I HAVE A QUESTION ON 11L. WE'RE PURCHASING A TV VAN BECAUSE? [NOISE] >> BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT GOES THROUGH OUR SEWER LINES AND OUR DRAIN LINES. IT'S NOT A TV. I GUESS YOU MIGHT WANT TO WATCH THIS STUFF BUT IT'S CRAPPY. [LAUGHTER] >> I WAS THINKING OF SOME MOBILE UNIT. >> NO. WELL, IT IS MOBILE BUT THIS IS WHEN YOU CALL US AND YOU SAY WE CAN HAVE SEWER PROBLEMS. REALLY WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO IS WE DUAL-PURPOSE THESE TRUCKS, WE USE THEM IN OUR SEWER LINES BUT WE ALSO USE THEM IN OUR DRAINAGE LINES. >> THIS IS THE SECOND TRUCK WE HAVE? >> YES. FROM TWO. THIS WILL ACTUALLY BE NUMBER 3. >> NUMBER 3. WE GOT THREE OF THESE TRUCKS? >> WE HAVE TWO RIGHT NOW THIS WILL BE NUMBER 3. >> WHEN I GOT HERE WE DIDN'T HAVE ONE THAT WORKED. >> MARIE, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? >> MY NEXT ONE WAS 11A(A). [OVERLAPPING] GOD, HE HAD A QUESTION. >> [BACKGROUND] I'M GOOD, GO AHEAD. JUST GO. >> NO, HE HAD A QUESTION. >> GO RIGHT AHEAD. >> I'M GOOD. [OVERLAPPING] >> 11A(A). ON THE XEROX COPIERS. >> HELLO. >> HI. SEVENTY-SEVEN THOUSAND ANNUALLY, HOW MANY COPIERS IS THAT? >> TWENTY-ONE. >> THERE ARE THROUGHOUT EVERYWHERE? >> THERE'S GOING TO BE 21 AND THEY'RE SPREAD THROUGHOUT THE CITY, AND THEY ARE A LEASE FOR FOUR YEARS. THAT COST INCLUDES YOUR DISPOSABLES, MEANING YOUR INK AND THEN I BELIEVE THE BLACK AND WHITE IS UNLIMITED. BLACK AND WHITE WITH A COLD IMPRINT. THEN COLOR COPIERS HAVE A LIMITATION ON HOW MANY AND THEN IT'S LIKE THREE CENTS PER COPY THEREAFTER. >> IT'S A LITTLE CLIPPY. >> WHAT IS OUR LIMIT? YOU CAN HAVE XYZ COLOR COPIERS. >> I DON'T HAVE THAT. IT IS IN THE PACKET, BUT I CAN GET IT FOR YOU. >> IF IT'S IN A PACKET I CAN. >> THEN THIS IS SUBSTANTIALLY REDUCED. WE CURRENTLY ARE PAYING $10,000 A MONTH FOR LESS COPIERS. [01:10:02] THIS IS A NEGOTIATED DOWNLANE. OUR NEXT FOUR YEARS WE'RE GOING TO BE IN MUCH BETTER SHAPE. >> GIVEN THE IMPROVEMENTS IN PRINTER QUALITY AND OTHER THINGS TOO, WE DON'T USE THESE AS MUCH AS WE USED TO. >> NO, BUT PRINTERS HAVE BECOME SO INEXPENSIVE. >> THAT'S WHY I'M SAYING [OVERLAPPING] >> THE PRINTERS THEMSELVES HAVE BECOME INEXPENSIVE. IT'S THE INK THEY GET YOU. [OVERLAPPING] >> WE JUST SAW DELIVERY VEHICLES FOR SELLING INK. >> A KIT FOR PERSONAL PRINTER THAT COST YOU 175 BUCKS IS $500. THE INK IS WHAT? [OVERLAPPING] YEAH, ABSOLUTELY. >> THANK YOU, HOPE, VERY MUCH. ANYTHING ELSE, MARY? >> NO. >> VERY GOOD. DAVID FINKLEA, ANY QUESTIONS ON THE CLARIFICATION? >> NO. I APPRECIATE YOU LETTING ME GO AFTER, THANKS. [LAUGHTER]. >> NO DOUBT MATE. >> THANK YOU AND I'M THE LAST AND I HAVE NO QUESTIONS. LET'S MOVE TO ITEM 3B, PLEASE. GOT YOU. [3.B. Discussion Of Recent Amendments To The Beach Access Plan (T. Tietjens – 20 Min)] >> 3B DISCUSSION OF RECENT AMENDMENTS TO THE BEACH ACCESS PLAN. >> TIM, COME FORWARD AND [OVERLAPPING] >> THREE MINUTES, SIR. >> DID YOU WANT TO SIT HERE OR? >> I HAVE SOME CLICKERS TO USE HERE. >> WE COULD TAKE A BREAK. [LAUGHTER] >> ONE ITEM AND WE'RE ALREADY TAKING A BREAK. [LAUGHTER] >> WE'VE ALREADY HAD THREE CUPS OF COFFEE, SORRY. [LAUGHTER] [BACKGROUND] >> IF YOU IDENTIFY YOURSELF, PLEASE, TIM. >> ABSOLUTELY. >> THANK YOU. [NOISE] >> GOOD MORNING. THANK YOU FOR HAVING ME. I DO HAVE A POWERPOINT PRESENTATION, BUT I WANTED TO GIVE YOU GUYS AN UPDATE ON WHAT WE'RE DOING WITH BEACH ACCESS PLAN, WHERE FOR CONTEXT, YOU NEED TO REALLY HEAR SOME OF THE THINGS THAT WE'VE GONE THROUGH TO UNDERSTAND WHERE WE NEED TO GO FORWARD. FROM THE STANDPOINT OF ANY PLAN AMENDMENT THAT GOES THROUGH THE GLO HAS BASICALLY TWO ADMINISTRATIVE RULES THAT THE GLO IMPLEMENTS. ONE IS THAT YOUR BEACH ACCESS PLAN MUST BE COMPLIANT. IS THIS ONE? >> YES. >> YOUR BEACH ACCESS PLAN MUST BE COMPLIANT AND YOU CAN ONLY SUBMIT ONE AMENDMENT AT A TIME. THAT'S THE CONTEXT UNDER WHICH WE OPERATE THROUGH THE GLO. WE'VE BEEN WORKING ON COMPLIANCE FOR, TO BE FRANK, SOME TIME, A COUPLE OF YEARS AND THE GLO BASICALLY MANDATES THAT YOUR PHYSICAL CONDITIONS MATCH WHAT'S IN YOUR PLAN. WE HAVE AN OLD PLAN, IT'S A 2004 PLAN. IT WAS BASED UPON INFORMATION THAT WAS PRODUCED WITHOUT THE MAPPING RESOURCES WE HAVE TODAY WITH GIS, ALL THOSE THINGS. WHEN THE GLO WAS MANDATING THE COMPLIANCE ISSUES FOR WHETHER IT BE DURING WALKOVERS OR CONDITION OF THEM SOME HAD DETERIORATED AND HAD TO BE REPLACED, THE CONDITION OF PARKING, AND IT'S ADEQUACY, THE SIGNAGE THAT'S INVOLVED, ALL THOSE THINGS HAD TO BE REMEDIED AND DEALT WITH AND SO WE DID THAT. WE WORKED THROUGH ALL THIS AND THANKS TO CATHERINE GORMAN I DON'T SEE HER IN HERE RIGHT NOW, BUT CATHERINE REALLY MANAGED THE COMPLIANCE EFFORT THAT TOOK US TO THE POINT OF GETTING TO THE POINT WHERE WE COULD EVEN SUBMIT AMENDMENT. >> ANOTHER IMPORTANT THING, IF I MAY ADD TO THAT IS IT WAS WRITTEN BEFORE EIGHT WHICH IS A KEY POINT. >> THAT'S RIGHT, 2004 PREDATED BY FOUR-AND-A-HALF YEARS, SO YES MAAM. IN TERMS OF THE TIMELINE, WHEN WE WERE MOVING THROUGH THE PLAN APPROVAL PROCESS, THERE'S TWO THINGS THAT THE GLO ALLOWS US TO DO, WHICH IS IN A FORMAL, INFORMAL PLAN SUBMITTAL, WE CAN COMMENT ON WHAT WE GENERALLY THINK WE WANT TO DO WITH THIS. [01:15:01] THEN THE FORMAL SUBMITTAL WAS ACTUALLY THE ORDINANCES AND THE CHANGES THAT ARE IN IT. ON OCTOBER 20TH, WE HAD OUR INFORMAL SUBMITTAL OF THOSE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS. [NOISE] I'M SORRY. >> I GUESS THAT'S A DOG. >> [LAUGHTER] I DIDN'T REALIZE I WAS DOING THAT. THE APPROACH WE WERE INTENDING TO TAKE WAS TO HIT OBVIOUSLY WHERE WE HAD INVESTMENT THAT WAS PENDING AND WAITING TO HAPPEN. FIRST AND FOREMOST, ALONG WITH A VERY CLOSE SECOND TO THAT, OUR COMPLIANCE ISSUES WOULD BE SUBMITTED AND THEN WE WANTED TO GET TO THE BEACH IN DOING COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS AS WELL SO THROUGHOUT THAT NOTION OF HAVING A THREE-PHASE APPROACH TO THIS AND IN FACT DID SO, AT LEAST IN OUR INFORMAL SUBMITTAL. THEN, OF COURSE, THE FIRST PHASE OF THAT DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS WERE BEACHSIDE VILLAGE, THE RAVE PROJECT, AND THE TIARA PROJECT. WE THEN RECEIVED THE RESPONSE TO THAT INFORMAL SUBMITTAL IN DECEMBER 19TH. OBVIOUSLY, WE WEREN'T QUITE COMPLETE WITH OUR COMPLIANCE EFFORT AT THAT POINT. WE STILL HAD AT THAT POINT, IT WAS MOSTLY JUST SIGNAGE LEFT TO HANDLE. WE WORKED THROUGH THAT AND WE FINISHED THE SIGNAGE IN EARLY '23. >> CAN I MAKE A COMMENT ON THAT SIGNAGE BECAUSE I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT FOR THE COUNCIL OF PEOPLE TO KNOW MORE ESPECIALLY, ON THE WEST BEACH AREA. PRETTY MUCH ONCE WE'VE PUT UP A SIGN WITHIN TWO WEEKS SOMEBODY STEALS IT JUST SO THAT I DON'T KNOW WHERE ALL THOSE SIGNS GO. I'M SURE DECORATE SOME KID'S BEDROOM OR SOMETHING. >> THE HOUSE IS NATIONWIDE. >> THAT'S AN ABSOLUTE PROBLEM THAT WE DEAL WITH. IT COULD BE THE VERY NEXT DAY WHEN FOLKS JUST DON'T LIKE THE MANDATES THAT WE'RE PUTTING OUT THERE WITH THOSE SIGNS. BUT THAT'S A PERFECT SEGUE INTO THE NEXT PIECE OF THIS, WHICH IS WHERE WE ENDED UP GOING BECAUSE WE HAD FINISHED UP BASICALLY EVERYTHING WE WERE DOING WITH THE SIGNAGE AT THAT POINT THAT THE GLO WANTED TO VERIFY THAT WE HAD A PROCESS FOR IMPLEMENTING SIGN REPLACEMENT. IN FEBRUARY 2ND THEY REQUIRED US TO PUT A POLICY PLAN TOGETHER. WE DID SO ON THE 8TH AND SUBMITTED THAT UP AND A MONTH LATER ON MARCH 8TH, THE GLO VERIFIED THAT POLICY PLAN AND APPROVED IT. THEN THEY SENT THE LETTER WHICH CONSIDERS COMPLIANCE EFFORTS COMPLETE. THAT WAS MARCH 8TH. NOW WE KNOW THAT AT THIS POINT WE CAN NOW FINALLY FORMALLY SUBMIT OUR AMENDMENTS. WE INTENDED TO DO SO AS WE HAD PREVIOUSLY DISCUSSED WITH THAT PHASE 1 ON THE THREE PROJECTS. WE DID THAT BY PASSING IN APRIL, THE FIRST OF THE THREE ORDINANCES, WHICH WAS THE ACCESS POINT 7, AT SUNNY BEACH THEN THE NEXT MONTH THE REINFORCED CONCRETE VARIANTS AND THEN THE ACCESS POINT 1C RESTRICTIONS FOR THE RESTRICTED USE AREA OF REMOVAL. THERE'S NOTHING IN LAW AT THE GLO OR ANYWHERE THAT REQUIRES US TO HAVE A RESTRICTED USE AREA, BUT NONETHELESS, WE HAVE ONE. WE HAD AT THAT POINT, GOTTEN TO THE POSITION OF WHY DON'T WE GENERATE A BETTER HANDICAP ACCESS PLAN THAT WE COULD SPREAD THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE ISLAND AND DO AWAY WITH THE RESTRICTED USE AREA TOTALLY. WE WERE TOLD THAT WAS NOT ALLOWABLE AND THAT WAS ALL IN RESPONSE TO OUR FORMAL AMENDMENT SUBMITTAL IN JUNE. IN AUGUST, WE THEN RECEIVED THAT LETTER OF RESPONSE. BASICALLY, THE GLO SAID NO COMPLIANCE MUST BE INCLUDED IN THIS INITIAL AMENDMENT PHASE AND SO WE HAD TO DO THAT. WE ALSO HAD TO THROW IN SOME THINGS [01:20:01] ABOUT THE REASON JUSTIFICATION THAT THEY WANTED TO HAVE AMENDED. IT'S ALL IN THE CONTEXT OF PRESERVING OR ENHANCING THE PUBLIC'S CURRENT USE OF THE BEACH. THERE WAS NO MENTION AT THAT POINT OF ANY ISSUES WITH AP7, SO WE WERE MOVING FORWARD WITH THAT. TO EUROPE, THE ONLY THING THAT REALLY WAS MENTIONED THERE WAS IN REGARD TO IF THERE'S SOME VARIANCE TO THE FEMA RULES, WE WOULD HAVE TO RUN THAT THROUGH PROPER CHANNELS, OF COURSE, AND THERE ARE NO VARIANCE REQUESTS, THE THING RULES. THEN THE RESTRICTED USE AREA. THEN THAT WAS FOLLOWED UP BY A LETTER OF GLO STAFF ON AUGUST 7TH. WE INITIALLY HIT BACK ON THAT FRIDAY, AUGUST 4TH, AND THEN ON AUGUST 7TH, WE HAD THIS "STAFF CLARIFICATION" OF THEIR DIRECTOR'S LETTER OF 84. BASICALLY, THEY DISCUSSED SOME THINGS ABOUT THE COST OF DISASTER CLEANUP, WHICH WE HAVE ADDRESSED IN OUR ORDINANCES CURRENTLY WITH SINGLE-FAMILY, IT'S ACTUALLY A ONE-SIZE-FITS-ALL PERSPECTIVE RIGHT NOW, IN THE RULE THAT THERE'S A 200-FOOT SET ASIDE FOR BEACH CLEANUP FEES WHEN SOMEBODY'S DEVELOPING OUT IN THOSE AREAS. THIS BEING COMMERCIAL, WE UNDERSTOOD IT WAS A DIFFERENT CONTEXT ENTIRELY. BUT THE GLO RULES ALSO STATE THAT STRUCTURES ADJACENT TO THE BEACH MUST BE DESIGNED FOR FEASIBLE RELOCATION. WE ALL KNOW THAT THE 11-STOREY BUILDING WILL NOT BE FEASIBLY RELOCATED IN ANY CIRCUMSTANCES. IT WAS A RECOGNITION OR I TOOK IT AS THE GLO TELLING US THAT RELOCATION MUST SOMEHOW BE DESIGNED IN AND SINCE WE CAN'T DO THAT, WE INSTEAD IMPLEMENT THE MEASURES THAT ARE IN OUR CARDINAL ORDINANCE, WHICH SAYS YOU IMPLEMENT A SERIES OF FINANCIAL GUARANTEES IN CASE THE PROJECT WERE EVER TO GET TO A POINT WHERE IT WERE TO COME DOWN. THAT'S ALREADY IN OUR ERP RESPONSES. THAT'S WHAT WE INTEND TO IMPLEMENT, NOT DESIGNING THIS FOR FEASIBLE RELOCATION. ANYHOW, THAT IS WHAT IT IS. THEN ON AUGUST 23RD [NOISE], WE HAD A MEETING WITH SENIOR STAFF, MARK HAVEN, WHO IS THE RIGHT-HAND STAFF MEMBER TO THE COMMISSIONER UP WITH THE GLO. AT THAT POINT, WE HAD A NUMBER OF CONCERNS ABOUT THE CONFLICTING INFORMATION INDIRECTION THAT WE WERE GETTING. ONE EXAMPLE FOR JUST TO THROW OUT THERE WAS WE WERE TOLD BY THE DIRECTOR THAT WE COULD RELOCATE THAT SPECIAL USE AREA OUT ANYWHERE ALONG THE ISLAND AND WE SPECIFICALLY AT THE QUESTION, COULD EVEN SAN LOUIS PASS, WE COULD RELOCATE IT OUT THERE. HE SAID YES. THERE WERE SEVERAL PEOPLE IN A MEETING THAT WITNESSED THAT AND THEN HIS STAFF CAME BACK AND SAID NO. IT WAS A LITTLE BIT OF A SURPRISE TO HEAR THAT. BUT NONETHELESS, WE WANTED TO DO WHAT WE COULD TO COMPLY WITH WHERE THEY WERE HEADED SO THAT THE THOUSAND-FOOT RESTRICTED-USE AREA. WE SAID WE'LL GO AHEAD AND COMPLY WITH THAT AND TRY TO RELOCATE IT SOMEWHERE ELSE BECAUSE YOU GUYS ARE MANDATING IT. BUT WE WANTED TO DO THAT REALLY WITH THE PURPOSE OF PROVIDING HANDICAP ACCESS AND MR. HAVENS WAS ABSOLUTELY ON BOARD WITH THAT. MR. GREEN WAS ON BOARD WITH THAT. THEY SAY, YEAH, THAT'S REALLY OUR MAJOR CONCERN AS A HANDICAP ACCESS. WE HAD A DEVELOPER WHO WAS DOING VERIFICATION OF HOW MANY PEOPLE WERE VISITING HIS BEACH, WHICH IS THE REEF PROJECT AREA HERE ON THE EAST END. THOSE NUMBERS HAD BEEN SUPPLIED OVER A PERIOD OF FIVE YEARS AND THEY REALLY INDICATED NOT NEARLY THE DEGREE OF USE THAT WOULD WARRANT A 2,600-FOOT AREA. [01:25:04] NONETHELESS, WE WEREN'T ALLOWED TO DO AWAY WITH THE RESTRICTED USE AREA, AND WE WERE TOLD THAT. THAT WAS OUR PERSPECTIVE GOING FORWARD AS WE COULD HAVE TO RELOCATE IT SOMEPLACE AND THE DIRECTOR SAID, WE'LL SEND SOME HATS STAFF DOWN TO HELP YOU GUYS WITH WHERE THAT MIGHT BE BEST. WE HAD SOME INITIAL CONVERSATIONS ON SEPTEMBER 27TH WITH NATALIE BELL ANGIE SUNRY AND AT THAT POINT THEN WE LEARNED THAT THEY ACKNOWLEDGED THE RESTRICTED USE AREA MUST BE RETAINED, CAN BE RELOCATED. HOWEVER, THAT RELOCATION CANNOT BE COUNTED IN AN AREA THAT ALREADY HAS PUBLIC DRIVE ON BEACH TO THE WEBPAGE. WELL, THAT WAS A NEW WRINKLE THAT WE HADN'T HEARD BEFORE. BUT THAT SIGNIFICANTLY REDUCES OUR ABILITY TO RELOCATE IN AN AREA THAT WORKS BECAUSE MOST OF THE DRIVE-ON BEACHES ALL UP AND DOWN THE BEACH, THE ONES THAT ARE IN FRONT OF PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT ALLOW PARKING IN THE WET BEACH AREA. BECAUSE OF THAT, WE CAN UTILIZE ANY OF THOSE FOR THIS HANDICAP PARKING. IN OUR PUBLIC SPOTS, WE HAVE POCKET PARK ONE WHICH DOES ALLOW FOR IT THERE, SO WE COULDN'T USE IT THERE, POCKET PARK 2, WHICH IS WHERE THE TIP SEA TURTLE IS, WE HAVE TO GRAB SOME ADDITIONAL ACCESS TO GET OUT TO THE WET BEACH. >> CAN I ASK A SIMPLE-MINDED QUESTION? >> YES, SIR. >> WHY DON'T WE JUST SHIFT THE 1,000 FEET WEST ONTO STORED BEACH? >> THAT'S WHERE WE'RE HEADED. >> HOLD ON. NOT NECESSARILY THAT WAY, BUT HOLD ON. YOU'LL SEE. >> WE'RE COMING TO THAT. >> WE'RE COMING TO THAT. YES, SIR. THIS IS FOR CONTEXT OF WHY WE'VE HAD TO JUMP THROUGH SOME REALLY BIZARRE. >> KEEP IT ON JUST TO SUMMARIZE WHERE WE'RE AT RIGHT, ON THIS SLIDE, WE'VE GOT A SPECIAL USE AREA THAT IS NOT MENTIONED ANYWHERE IN STATE LAW, YET WE HAVE ONE. IT'S BEING UPHELD BY THE GLO. WE'VE MET WITH THE GLO MULTIPLE TIMES. >> WHAT'S BEING UPHELD BY CERTAIN PEOPLE ON GLO. >> WHAT WE'RE SEEING IS, AND I WILL TELL YOU THAT MARK HAVEN HAS BEEN FANTASTIC TO WORK WITH AS AS DAVID GREEN. BUT I WILL TELL YOU IT IS ALMOST AS IF BECAUSE THIS AREA IS SO NEBULOUS AND DOESN'T EXIST IN LAW THAT THE RULES REGARDING IT ARE BEING MADE UP AS WE GO AND WE'RE JUST CLINGING ONTO THE BUMPER [OVERLAPPING] THIS TRUCK AND TRYING TO CONVEY. >> THAT'S CORRECT [NOISE]. WELL PUT BRIAN. WE HAVE VERY LITTLE OPTION NOW AS TO WHERE THAT RESTRICTED USE AREA COULD BE RELOCATED. >> THOUGHT WE'RE TALKING OF THOUSAND LINEAR FEET. >> A THOUSAND LINEAR FEET. >> THEY HAD 2,600 OUT THERE. >> WE HAD 26 AND THE 16 IN FRONT OF THE PRESERVE OF GRAM BEACH. [OVERLAPPING] >> YOU'VE ALREADY CLOSED THAT. >> THAT STAYING FOR NOW. >> IN FRONT OF THE RESERVE. >> RESERVE AT GRAM BEACH, YES. THE 1,000 FEET EAST OF THAT. >> IS CLOSE DOWN. >> YES. PER YEAR ORDINANCE AND THE GLO REQUIRES THAT YOU PASS THESE ORDINANCES PRIOR TO THEM AND REVIEWING IT. THAT'S WHAT'S BEEN DONE. BUT WE DIDN'T REALIZE AT THE TIME THAT WE COULDN'T CREATE A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR HANDICAP ACCESS UP AND DOWN THE BEACH. IT'S NOW BEING RELEGATED TO THE EAST END ONLY, AND THERE'S VERY FEW SPOTS IN WHICH IT CAN OCCUR. OUR HANDS ARE A BIT TIED. AGAIN, WE COULD GO BACK TO POCKET PARK 2 WHICH DOESN'T HAVE DRIVE ON ACCESS TO THE BEACH RIGHT NOW, BUT IT GETS NEAR IT. WE'D HAVE TO CREATE SOME ACCESS TO IT IN ORDER. >> [INAUDIBLE]. >> THAT IS CORRECT. >> YOU HAVE A RECOMMENDATION THOUGH, TIM? >> YES, I DO. >> LET'S JUST CUT IT. [LAUGHTER] >> [OVERLAPPING] LET ME ADVANCE. THIS IS 1,000 FEET THAT WE'RE REMOVING OR HAVE REMOVED IN OUR ORDINANCE JUST EAST OF PRESERVE AT GRANT BEACH, AND THIS IS THE 1,000 FEET THAT IS AN OPTION. LIKE YOU SUGGESTED DAVID WE COULD MOVE IT IMMEDIATELY TO THE WEST OF WHERE THAT IS WHICH STARTS AT THIS POINT RIGHT HERE. WE COULD MOVE THAT 1,000 FEET HERE, BUT THAT'S REALLY THE MOST PRIMARY ON STEWART BEACH WHERE [01:30:03] PEOPLE PUT THEIR UMBRELLAS, THEIR CHAIRS. THAT'S PART OF THE PROBLEM WITH THIS REQUIREMENT THAT IT NEEDS TO BE RIGHT ON THE WET BEACH IS THAT IT TAKES UP SPOTS. >> WE ALL KNOW HOW GOOD CARS ARE FOR THE WET BEACH. >> THAT'S WHAT'S THE MOST CONTRARY THING. IT'S [OVERLAPPING] RECOMMENDING PARTS OF THE WET BEACH. >> A LITTLE BIT FURTHER WEST THEN. >> YES, SIR. >> OKAY. JUST FRONT OF THE WESTERN PORTION OF STEWART BEACH >> WHICH IS IN FRONT OF THE DRAINAGE. >> CATCHMENT AREA. >> CATCHMENT AREA. GOOD, THANK YOU >> YES. >> IT'S NOT AN AREA THAT IS EASILY ACCESSIBLE BY USERS OF STEWART BEACH. IN FACT WE CAN PROVIDE DIRECT ACCESS VIA CAR TO THIS AREA. >> WE HAD 2,600 LINEAR FEET. THEY'RE FINE THAT IT WILL BE 1,000 LINEAR FEET. >>WE'RE KEEPING THIS 1,600 REMAINING IN THE ORIGINAL DATA OVER THERE AT THIS TIME? YES, SIR AND THEN THE THOUSAND FEET THAT WE'RE ORIGINALLY SUGGESTING JUST BE REPLACED BY A GOOD HANDLE BY ACCESS. >> [INAUDIBLE] AND NOT SPOILER. THIS IS ONE OF THE CHANGES THAT WE WERE GOING TO BRING YOU THIS WEEK, SOME STEWART BEACH PLANNING. THIS CHANGE HERE HAS PRECIPITATED A LITTLE BIT OF DELAY. THAT'S WHY YOU'RE GETTING IT IN OCTOBER WHICH WAS ORIGINALLY SCHEDULED. THIS ACCESS AREA HERE, IT WILL BE HANDICAPPED AND IT WILL BE A CONTROLLED AREA. YOU TO HAVE TO PAY FOR IT, BUT IT'LL BE SCREENED. YOU'RE NOT GOING TO HAVE TO HAVE HANDICAP CREDENTIALS TO ENTER THIS AREA. >> THIS CHANGE HERE THAT YOU'RE RECOMMENDING WILL COME TO US OCTOBER POSSIBLY OR. >> YES. WE'RE PROPOSING THIS IN OCTOBER 26TH, THAT MEETING. >> WE'LL ALSO HAVE YOUR STEWART BEACH PLAN, RIGHT? >> EXCUSE ME MIKE, JUST ONE SECOND. THE SUNNY BEACH PLAN, WE'RE GOOD TO GO. >> YES. >> ALL RIGHT. >> THE TIARA PLAN. >> WE ARE GOOD TO GO AS WELL THERE. >> MIKE, DID YOU JUST SAY THAT YOU HAD TO PAY TO GET TO THE HANDICAPPED BEACH. >> NO. [OVERLAPPING]. IT'LL BE A CONTROLLED SPOTS, SO YOU'LL HAVE TO PASS THROUGH THE SAME GATE. RIGHT NOW IF YOU'RE HANDICAPPED YOU DON'T PAY. TO ENTER THAT AREA YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO SHOW HANDICAP CREDENTIALS. YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO HAVE HANDICAP LICENSE PLATE, HANDICAPPED PLACARD, THOSE TYPE THINGS. >> CURRENTLY THERE IS NO REAL RIGHT AND GAIT THEY PASS THROUGH WHICH I CAN'T BELIEVE HE DID, THE DEVELOPER WAS OUT THERE TAKING PICTURES FOR FIVE YEARS SO WE'RE ACTUALLY WITH MINIMAL HANDICAP MORE OF IT. >> IT DOES US NO GOOD. >> IT DOESN'T MEAN ANYTHING ONE, HANDICAPPED PERSON DESERVES TO BE ON THE BEACH. >> I AGREE. >>DON'T TELL ME THERE WAS MINIMAL AMOUNT, BUT THERE IS NO MINIMAL AMOUNT. >> PROTECTING THIS WILL PROTECT IT MORE FOR HANDICAP. >> THAT'S RIGHT. >> THE ISSUE MIKE IS THAT WE'RE GOING TO GREAT LENGTHS TO PROVIDE HANDICAP ACCESS, BUT THE AREAS ARE GETTING CONSUMED BY NON HANDICAPPED PEOPLE. I'M GOING TO ENSURE THAT THIS AREA IS FOR USE BY THOSE WHO NEED IT. >> IS THAT GOING TO BE STILL BEHIND IT? IS THAT GOING TO BE THE CATCH BASIN? >> YES. >> YEAH. YOU SHOULD GO LOOK AT IT. >> I'VE BEEN THERE. I'VE SEEN IT. >> WHEN IT WAS TOWARDS THE EAST. IT WAS FOR FISHERMEN AND IT WAS FOR WATERCRAFT. IF YOU HAD WATERCRAFT, PERSONAL WATER, ETC. >> IS THAT STILL THE SITUATION HERE? >> NO GLO HAS SAID NO, WE'RE REALLY MORE INTERESTED. AT LEAST SENIOR STAFF MEMBERS HAVE SAID WE'RE INTERESTED IN THE HANDICAP ACCESS BECAUSE THE NUMBERS, AGAIN, MR. ANDERSON HAD GATHERED OVER ALL THOSE YEARS HAD SHOWN VERY LITTLE OF THE OTHER USES. EVEN HANDICAP WAS FAIRLY A LOW NUMBER AS WELL, BUT AGAIN THE GLO WAS WORKING TOWARD HANDICAP ACCESS BY PROVIDING THE PARK BOARD WITH SOME HANDICAP ACCESS WHEELCHAIRS THAT ARE BEACH-ACCESSIBLE AS WELL AS MOLAR MASS, AND THEY'VE ALSO COMMITTED TO US THAT THEY'RE GOING TO PROVIDE SOME OF THAT TO US. >> THERE WILL BE A COMPONENT OF THE STEWART BEACH PLAN THAT OFFERS AN AREA FOR HANDICAPPED AS WELL IN ADDITION TO THIS, BUT HAS MORE AMENITIES WITH IT BECAUSE IT'S GOING TO BE PART OF THE PARK. THIS IS THE NO-FRILLS HANDICAP AREA. IF YOU WANT TO DRIVE YOUR HANDICAP ACCESSIBLE VEHICLE RIGHT TO THE EDGE OF THE WATER, THIS IS YOUR ABILITY TO DO THAT. >> GOOD. ANY QUESTIONS JOHN? >> WE STILL HAVE THE 1,600 FEET TO THE EAST. WHY DON'T WE JUST MOVE IT ALL OVER THERE? >> BECAUSE IT'S A HALF-MILE. >> NOT ENOUGH ROOM IS 2,600 FEET. [OVERLAPPING] >> I UNDERSTAND THAT DISTANCE. >> [INAUDIBLE] HAS A QUESTION. >> BECAUSE DO WE HAVE TO OWN THIS PROPERTY? WELL, WE DON'T OWN THAT BEACH. >> NO. >> WHY ISN'T THERE ENOUGH ROOM. >> WE OWN THAT. >> WELL, YOU DON'T OWN. IF YOU WENT ANY FURTHER WEST, YOU'RE GOING TO BE JUMPING ONTO THE PARETO'S AREA. >> THAT'S ALL I'M ASKING. WE DON'T OWN THE PROPERTY, BUT THAT'S WHY. [01:35:02] >> I'M NOT GOING TO WEIGH IN WHETHER WE DON'T OWN IT. >> YOU GET INTO THIS TECHNICALITY OF PRIVATE PROPERTY AND WE DON'T WANT TO GO THERE. >> IT'S ON PRIVATE PROPERTY NOW BUT ONLY 1,600 IS ON PRIVATE PROPERTY TODAY. THIS NEW THOUSAND FEET WILL BE ON PUBLIC PROPERTY, THE 2,600 IS ON PRIVATE PROPERTY TODAY. >> PRIVATE PROPERTY. >> YOU STARTED WITH THE EASTERN TERMINUS OF STEWART BEACH AND GO 2,600 FEET EAST. >> THAT'S ALL PRIVATE PROPERTY. >> TO THE WATERLINE? >> TO THE WEST. >> TO THE WEST OF THE BEACH, THE HIGH HIGH TIDE. >> THIS IS REALLY NOT ON THE WET BEACH. >> HERE'S THE THING. IT'S GOT TO BE A LITTLE HIGHER UP BECAUSE YOU REALLY CAN'T PARK ON THE WERE BEACH. THAT'S A COMPLETE MISNOMER FOR THE GLO LANDINGS. >> THAT'S WHY I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND THE TERMINOLOGY WE'RE USING HERE. IT'S NOT REALLY ON THE WET BEACH. >> IT'S HIGHER UP. >> PRACTICALLY SPEAKING, NOT ON THE WET BEACH, IT'S ADJACENT TO THE WET BEACH, BUT THE GLO SAYS LET'S MAKE SURE THAT THEY HAVE ACCESS TO THE WET BEACH DIRECTLY. >> THE MAIN IMPORTANT THING IS IT'S AN ACCESS TO THE WET BEACH THAT HAS NEVER BEEN THERE. >> I UNDERSTAND ALL THAT. THIS AREA HERE WILL BE SCREENED JUST DURING THE HOURS THAT THE PARK OPERATES. >> CORRECT. >> PEOPLE WILL BE ABLE TO DRIVE DOWN THERE AFTER PARK CLOSES? IT WILL NOT BE SOMEBODY TO DRIVE DOWN THERE. IT'LL BE OPEN TO THE PUBLIC. THAT'S HOW THE OTHER ONE IS CURRENTLY, RIGHT? >> CORRECT. >> RIGHT. >> OKEY-DOKEY. >> DAVID FINKLEA. >> I DIDN'T HAVE LESS IMPACT ON HOMEOWNERS AND CITIZENS BECAUSE IT'S IN FRONT OF THE CATCHMENT AREA AND NOBODY UNTIL THIS PRIME REAL ESTATE BEHIND IT GETS DEVELOPED, NOBODY WITHOUT FENCES. >> THERE WE GO. MY QUESTION MAYOR AND DIRECTED TO MR. MAXWELL OR MR. [INAUDIBLE], IS THAT WHAT IS THE APPROVAL PROCESS FOR BOTH COUNCIL IN ANY TYPE OF PUBLIC HEARING ASSOCIATED WITH THIS AMENDMENT TO THE BEACH ACCESS PLAN? >> THE APPROVAL PROCESS IS BASICALLY THIS AMENDMENT HAS BEEN SUBMITTED TO THE GLO. WE ARE PROPOSING TO HAVE A HEARING WITH YOU ALL ON THE 26TH OF OCTOBER. THE PLANNING COMMISSION DOES GET A SHOT AT AT THE COMPLIANCE ASPECTS OF THIS PLAN, AND THEN WE PLAN TO DO THAT ON OCTOBER 3RD WITH THEM. THE THOUSAND FOOT WOULD BE AMENDED IN THE BEACH ACCESS PLAN AND ADD IT INTO THAT LANGUAGE ALONG WITH THE OTHER FEW THINGS THAT WE DID IN THE COMPLIANCE EFFORT THAT MANDATED AN ORDINANCE CHANGE. ON THE 26TH YOU'LL BE SEEING ABOUT I THINK IT'S FIVE OR SIX ITEMS, HOW THE FIVE OR SIX ITEMS THAT WE NEED TO AMEND ON BOTH COMPLIANCE AND THIS RELOCATION OF THE REA >> OKAY. >> CLARIFICATION, THE TIMELINE DIDN'T QUITE MATCH OUT THERE. YOU SAID SEPTEMBER 26TH CITY COUNCIL IS GOING TO RESPOND. >> OCTOBER. [OVERLAPPING] >> I'M SORRY IF I SAID SEPTEMBER, I MEAN OCTOBER. >> THERE WE GO. OCTOBER 6TH THE COMPLIANCE ONLY PORTION OF THIS IS GOING TO PLANNING COMMISSION, AND THEN THAT'LL BE BROUGHT FORWARD IN ADDITION TO THESE OTHER AMENDMENTS ON OCTOBER 26TH TO CITY COUNCIL. >> YES SIR. >> VERY GOOD. THANK YOU. >> GOOD. ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS, JOHN? >> 1,600 FEET TO THE EAST, THAT REMAINS THE SAME. >> IT REMAINS THE SAME. YES, SIR. >> CAN WE GET CONFIRMATION FROM THE GLO THAT THEY DO NOT HAVE JURISDICTION OVER THAT AREA WHEN IT COMES TO RECREATIONAL VEHICLES OR FISHERMEN? THE JUDGE IS REQUIRING US TO HAVE THAT 1,600 FEET JUST FOR HANDICAP ACCESS. >> NO. THE 1,600 FEET REMAINS EXACTLY AS IT IS NOW. >> BUT YOU SAID THAT THE GLO DOES NOT CARE ABOUT THE FISHERMEN ACCESS. >> CORRECT. FOR THE 1,000 FEET. ONE OF THEM RELOCATED SOUTH. [OVERLAPPING] >> EVEN THOUGH THERE'S NOT ANYTHING WRITTEN ON THIS SPECIAL USE STEEL, THEY'RE STILL REQUIRING US TO PROVIDE FISHING ACCESS AND FISHING AND WHAT ELSE? >> TO RETAIN THAT WITHIN THE 1,600 FEET AS IT IS NOW AND THEN WITH THE APPLICATION OF 1,000 FEET. >> THEY'RE BASICALLY WRITING THAT LAW NOW. >> WELL, IF I COULD INTERJECT IT'S IN OUR BEACH ACCESS PLAN TODAY, [01:40:04] THEREFORE IT IS LAW. IT'S WAS ADOPTED AND SO WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO IS WE'VE TRIED TO CHANGE THEM AND THEY'RE NOT. >> TO FURTHER EXPLAIN THEY ARE ALSO NOT IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE AMOUNT OF PARKING THEY WILL NEED FOR THAT 1,600 FEET. >> WHAT I'M ASKING THOUGH IS THE GLO SOUNDS LIKE THEY ARE ONLY CONCERNED ABOUT THE HANDICAPPED PARKING. >> LET ME TAKE A STAB AT THIS. THERE'S 2,600 FEET. WE TOOK 1,000 FEET OFF. WE'RE ASKING TO TAKE 1,000 FEET OFF. THEY'RE SAYING LOOK, IF YOU'RE GOING TO TAKE 1,000 FEET OFF LET'S FOCUS WHATEVER YOU TAKE OFF AND MOVE FOR HANDICAPPED SPECIFIC BECAUSE I WOULD TELL YOU THAT AFTER GOING OUT THERE SEVERAL TIMES MYSELF THE USERS IN THE 2,600 AREA DON'T MIX WELL EITHER. YOU DON'T. CAR IS MOVING AROUND, FISHERMEN. HAVING A FAMILY-FRIENDLY, HANDICAP ACCESSIBLE AREA IS A LITTLE DIFFERENT. THE GLO TOOK A DIFFERENT LOOK AT IT, AND THEY WANTED TO HAVE DIRECT ACCESS TO THE WET BEACH FOR HANDICAPPED PURPOSES. HANDICAP USE CAN STILL OCCUR ON THE 1,600 FEET. BUT IF A HANDICAPPED PERSON WANTS A MORE SPECIFIC AREA THAT'S A LITTLE BIT SAFER WITHOUT FISHERMEN, PEOPLE, OR BOATS BEING LAUNCHED, TRAILERS BEING BACKED UP, ALL THAT STUFF, THIS WOULD BE THE AREA TO GO TO. >> I UNDERSTAND THAT. >> OKAY. >> WHILE WE'RE NEGOTIATING WITH THE GLO THOUGH, I WAS TRYING TO GET SOME CLARITY ON THE 1,600 FEET IN CASE IN THE FUTURE. >> DEPENDS ON WHO YOU TALK TO AND WHAT DAY. JUST SAYING. >> WELL, THAT'S WHAT I'M TRYING TO GET CLARITY BECAUSE IT SEEMS LIKE THE PROBLEMS THAT ARE OCCURRING ARE NOT BECAUSE OF THE HANDICAP THAT ARE DOWN THERE. IS BECAUSE OF THE FISHERMEN OR PEOPLE LAUNCHING BOATS. >> IT'S NOT EVEN THAT. >> THAT IS ALL THAT'S ALLOWED ON THE BEACH. IF THEY'RE NOT HANDICAPPED, THEY HAVE TO BE FISHERMEN OR LAUNCHING A BOAT. I'M NOT SAYING THAT A FISHERMAN OR A PERSON LAUNCHING HIS BOAT AS CREATING THE PROBLEM, BUT THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE POSING AS. BECAUSE THAT'S THE ONLY PEOPLE THAT ARE ALLOWED ON THE BEACH. >> THERE'S NO GATEKEEPER, DAN. >> I KNOW THAT. >> THERE'S A GATEKEEPER DURING THE DAY. OUR COORDINATE MANAGER THERE. >> IF THEY SAY THEY ARE FISHERMEN. >> THEY LET THEM IN IF THEY MEET THOSE THREE CRITERIA. [OVERLAPPING] BUT IN THE EVENINGS, IN NIGHT HOURS, PEOPLE GET OUT THERE. [OVERLAPPING] >> RUNNING AROUND THE DUNES, DRIVING THEIR CARS. >> I UNDERSTAND THAT. WE'RE GOING THROUGH THIS PROCESS, IT SEEMS LIKE WE WOULD GET CLARITY THAT THAT IS SOMETHING IF WE WANTED TO DO SOMETHING ABOUT IN THE FUTURE, WE WOULD HAVE CLARITY ON THAT SO WE WOULDN'T HAVE TO GO THROUGH THIS PROCESS AGAIN. BECAUSE WE'RE MOVING THE 1,000 FEET, THEY'RE NOT MAKING US PUT ANOTHER 1,000 FEET FOR ALL THREE OF THOSE USES. JUST FOR ONE. IN THE FUTURE, IF WE SAY, HEY, WE'RE HAVING SOME PROBLEMS OUT THERE, WE WANT TO STILL ALLOW HANDICAP ACCESS, BUT WE WANT TO CUT OUT THESE OTHER THINGS, IT'D BE NICE IF WE KNEW THAT NOW, IF WE HAD THAT ABILITY TO DO. >> I DON'T DISAGREE THAT IT WOULD BE NICE. >> IT'D BE WHEN I GET THAT CLARITY. [LAUGHTER] >> OTHER THINGS WOULD BE NICE TO GET CLARITY. >> WELL, PERSONALLY, THEY APPARENTLY INFORMALLY GIVEN APPROVAL FOR THIS 1,000 FEET TO JUST BE FOR HANDICAP. >> AT THE MOMENT. >> AT THE MOMENT IT IS SECOND. >> NO, I UNDERSTAND. I THINK WE JUST NEED TO MOVE FORWARD NOW. WE CAN COME BACK AND ADDRESS THAT SAFE BUT I DON'T WANT TO MUDDY THE WATERS. >> THAT'S WHERE WE ARE WITH THIS BECAUSE WE'VE HAD SO MANY MEETINGS BACK-AND-FORTH WITH GLO AND ABOUT CLARIFYING WHAT THEY'RE REQUIRING AND WHERE OUR UNDERSTANDING THAT PROCESS IS, THAT IT'S VERY DIFFICULT FOR US TO REALLY COME FORWARD WITH ANYTHING NOT KNOWING THAT IT WILL BE APPROVED OR NOT. >> WHEN WE RESPECT THE NEED FOR THE SPACE. WE RESPECT THE USE OF THE SPACE. WHAT'S CAUSING HIS CONSTERNATION IS, IS THAT THIS REQUIREMENT EXISTS NOWHERE, SO THE RULES SURROUNDING THIS REQUIREMENT ARE BEING MADE. >> THAT'S WHAT I WAS TRYING TO EXPLAIN. >> I DON'T THINK YOU'RE EVER GOING TO GET THAT CLARITY BECAUSE THESE IT'S JUST WHAT SOMEBODY FEELS THAT THE GLO THAT DAY BECAUSE THIS IS NOT CODIFIED ANYWHERE. THIS IS SOMETHING VERY UNIQUE TO GALVESTON. >> ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS FOR, TIM? >> YEAH. I'VE GOT ONE. >> YES. DAVID. >> WE'VE ONLY BEEN PRESENTED WITH ONE OPTION FOR THIS 1,000 LINEAR FOOT PROPOSED ADA SPECIALTY, YOU SAYING THE TWO QUESTIONS 1. TIM, AND I AGREE THAT YOU NEED MAKE SURE THAT THIS IS JUST FOR ADA. I THINK TWO, IT WOULD BE GOOD TO HAVE AN ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS, AND OFTEN OFFER UP MORE THAN ONE LOCATION. GETTING THE PROXIMITY OF THIS PROPOSE SPECIAL USE AREA BOAT TO THE PARETO'S AS WELL AS THE STEWARD BEACH, [01:45:01] AS WELL AS TO THE ADJACENT DEVELOPMENT. IT MIGHT BE GOOD TO LOOK AT AN ALTERNATIVE ANALYSIS TO COME UP WITH ANOTHER OPTION. JUST MY SUGGESTION. >> WE'LL LOOK AT IT, DAVID, BUT I'LL TELL YOU 1,000 FEET OF DRIVE ON WET BEACH, IT DOESN'T EXIST TODAY. A 1,000 FEET HERE, THOUSAND FEET THERE, FIRST THING YOU KNOW, WE'RE OUT OF 1,000 FEET. WE'RE VERY LIMITED AND WHERE THIS EXIST ON THE ISLAND TODAY. >> THERE ARE SOME PEOPLE IN GLM HIGHER UP THAT HAVE SAID IT CAN ONLY BE ON THE EAST. >> EAST END. >> EAST END AS WELL. >> THAT WAS COMMUNICATED DURING THE MEETINGS WITH THE GLO ATTEMPT. >> WELL, IT WAS COMMUNICATED WITH OUR MEETING AND IN SOME CORRESPONDENCE FROM NATALIE. THAT CAME FROM NATALIE. THERE ARE SOME SPOTS ALONG THE EAST BEACH AREA THAT WE COULD ALSO PROPOSE THIS. OBVIOUSLY, BEFORE WE GO DOWN ANY ROAD, WE'D WANT TO DISCUSS WITH THE PART BOARD WHERE THEIR THOUGHTS WOULD BEST HANDLE THAT. BUT I THINK THERE'S SOME WORK TO BE DONE HERE IN THE NEXT WEEK OR SO BEFORE WE SUBMIT THIS FORMALLY. >> YES. >> I APPRECIATE YOUR EFFORTS ON THAT, TO TAKE A LOOK AT THE ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS AND TO COLLABORATE WITH ART BOARD RELATED TO THIS AS WELL. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. BEFORE ALL THIS, WHEN WE ADD THE 2,600 LINEAL FEET, DID THAT BEACH ACCESS PLAN WORK? >> THAT'S HOW THE BEACHES EXCESS PLAN IS PHRASED OR CONDITIONED RIGHT NOW. >> IT WAS WORKING. EVERYBODY APPROVED IT? >> IT'S WORKING TO THE EXTENT THAT THE 2,600 FEET IS THERE, AND THOSE FOLKS CAN USE IT. BUT WE'VE HAD A REQUEST BY ONE OF THE ADJACENT LANDOWNERS. >> THIS IS MY QUESTION. BEFORE WE DID THIS ORDINANCE THAT 26 OR 2,700 SQUARE FEET OR LINEAL FEET IN THE BEACH ACCESS PLAN, THAT WAS ACCEPTABLE? >> YES. >> NOW WE'RE JUMPING THROUGH HOOPS >> WHAT WAS IT? >> NO. >> NO. >> NO. TWO THINGS, ONE, IT WASN'T ACCEPTABLE. SEMI PARK OUT THERE ONE NIGHT, IT WAS BEING ABUSED. IT WAS CONCEPTUALLY BEING ABUSED. SECOND, IN 1978, WE BEGAN TAKING CARS OFF THE BEACH IN FRONT OF PRIVATE RESIDENCES. WE'VE BEEN DOING THAT SYSTEMATICALLY FOR MORE THAN 40 YEARS. THERE WAS NO DEVELOPMENT ON THESE BEACH WHEN THAT WAS INITIALLY INITIATED. MOSTLY MOST OF THE DEVELOPMENT IS ON WEST BEACH. AS THE EAST BEACH HAS BEEN DEVELOPED, THAT'S HAPPENED BECAUSE THIS AREA USED TO EXTEND ALL THE WAY TO APPLEPARK. IT WAS CLOSED IN FRONT OF BEACH TOWN WHEN THAT WAS DEVELOPED. IT WAS CLOSED IN FRONT OF PALISADE PUMPS AND THAT WAS DEVELOPED. AS THIS REEF DEVELOPMENT AND THAT AREA IS BECOME DEVELOPED. NOW, THE GLO IS ALWAYS REQUIRED THAT WE ACCOMMODATE PARKING AND ACCESS TO THE BEACH. WE'VE DONE A GOOD JOB OF THAT. THEY'VE DONE IT FOR THIS AREA, THIS 1,000 FEET, WHICH IS WHY WE AGREED TO MOVE MOVE THAT AREA WEST. >> THIS HASN'T ALWAYS BEEN IN THE BEACH ACCESS PLAN, THIS WAS A RULING THAT WAS MADE BY A GENERAL LAND COMMENSURATE. >> JERRY PATTERSON. >> JERRY PATTERSON. IT IS NOWHERE IN TEXAS STATE LAW. IT IS NOWHERE IN THE TEXAS REGISTER. YOUR GENERAL QUESTION UNTIL THIS THAT OUR WHOLE BEACH ACCESS PLAN WORKED. IT DID BEFORE HURRICANE IKE. BUT THEN WHEN WE LOST HALF THE LAND, THAT WAS IN OUR ACCESS PLAN. >> MY QUESTION WAS SPECIFICALLY FOR THIS LOCATION, NOT FOR THE WHOLE BEACH ACCESS PLAN. FOR THIS LOCATION WE DIDN'T HAVE AN ISSUE. NOW WE'VE EVERYBODY'S TIME AND MONEY. BUT WE'RE SITTING HERE TALKING ABOUT IT AND WE COULD JUST LEAVE IT ALONE, AND WE WOULDN'T HAVE THIS PROBLEM. >> WE HAD QUITE A FEW ISSUES. >> WE JUST HAD SOME PARKING WE JUST NEEDED TO HAVE SOMEBODY OUT THERE ENFORCING WHAT NEEDED TO HAPPEN. >> WE HAD PARKING, WE HAD FIRES, WE HAD CAMPING, WE HAD UNRULY PARTIES. WE'VE HAD ISSUES. >> WITHOUT FALLING OFF. >> KYLE CLARK, COASTAL RESOURCES MANAGER. I JUST WANT TO JUST MAKE SURE WITH THE COUNCIL KNOWS THAT THE ORDINANCE THAT YOU-ALL TO REMOVE THE 1,000 FEET WAS FROM GUIDANCE FROM THE GENERAL LAND OFFICE. WE HAD A MEETING WITH THEM IN MAY. WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THIS DISGUSTING, REDUCING THE SIZE FROM 2,600 FEET TO 1,600 FEET. [01:50:01] REMOVING IT, THEY SAID THAT WOULD BE PLENTY. WOULD HAVE PROBABLY HAD TO ADDRESS IT MORE IN THE FUTURE IF WE WANTED TO REMOVE THE 1,600S FEET COMPLETELY AND THAT'S WHEN WE WOULD PROBABLY NEED TO ADDRESS THE ADA, THE FISHERMAN, AND THE NORMAL RAS VESSELS. THE DIRECTION WE GAVE WHEN IT CAME TO THE COUNCIL ABOUT REMOVING THIS AND NOT MOVING IT TO ANOTHER SESSION WAS FROM THE JELLO ON MAY 28TH MEETING WHERE THEY SAID, YES, YOU CAN REMOVE THAT 1,000 FEET. YOU'LL STILL HAVE 1,600. THEN WHEN WE GO THROUGH THE PROCESS, WE SUBMIT THE FORM OR ORDINANCE UP THERE AND THEY'RE JUST PATIENT. THAT'S WHEN THEY COME BACK AND SAID, NO, YOU MUST MAINTAIN THAT 1,000 FEET, YOU CAN'T GET RID OF IT. YOU HAD TO MAINTAIN. IT'S SOMEWHERE. AS RYAN SAID, WE'RE DEALING WITH THEM EVERY DAY TRYING TO GO BACK THE MEETING THAT TIM AND I HAD WITH THEM JUST TWO WEEKS AGO ON SOME OF THEM MEMO RESPONSE BACK TO OUR AMENDMENTS WAS THERE WERE BULLETS IN THERE AND IT'S LIKE, WELL, HOW DO WE ADDRESS THIS? THE COMMENT TO US WAS, THIS WAS ADDED BY A LAWYER. YOU DON'T REALLY NEED TO ADDRESS IT. I'M SITTING HERE TRYING TO GO THROUGH AND PULL TOGETHER INFORMATION TO BRING TO YOU ALL, TO GIVE YOU ALL GOOD INFORMATION. >> THAT'S WHY IN THIS SUBJECT. ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS FOR TIM OR KYLE HERE COUNCIL? THANK YOU. WE WILL BE TALKING ABOUT THIS MORE IN OCTOBER. >> NO PROBLEMS. ABSOLUTELY. >> I WOULD LIKE TO REQUEST A FIVE MINUTE BREAK. >> WE HAD A FIVE-MINUTE BREAKS. IT'S ALMOST 11. WELL, WE ARE AT 11 O'CLOCK, WE'RE GOING TO RECONVENE AND WE'RE GOING TO ITEM 3C, I'LL END NOW AT THAT POINT, THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. >> COUNCIL, THIS MAY BE A VERY SHORT SUBJECTS FOR YOU. [3.C. Discussion Of Permitted Uses And Design Standards For Broadway (Brown - 15 Min)] I BROUGHT THIS FORWARD. I HAVE BEEN APPROACHED BY A NUMBER OF INDIVIDUALS IN THE COMMUNITY ABOUT SECTION OF BROADWAY, SPECIFICALLY FROM 19TH-31ST, SOMEWHERE IN THAT AREA, TO RE-LOOK AT THE PERMITTED USES FOR THOSE PROPERTIES ON BROADWAY. WHAT BROUGHT THAT TO MINE WAS THE CORNER OF 25TH HERE IN BROADWAY, THAT IT'S AN ICONIC CORNER, AND THERE'S PERMITTED USES FOR THAT CORNER THAT OUR USES THAT MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY HAD BROUGHT TO MY ATTENTION MIGHT NOT BE IN KEEPING WITH MAINTAINING THEM BEYOND SO THAT CORNER AS IT IS STRUCTURED NOW. >> YOU KNOW IT'S PROBABLY TOO LATE TO DO ANYTHING ABOUT WHAT'S GOING THERE, RIGHT? >> YES, WE ALREADY KNOW THAT. WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO DO IS TALK TO COUNCIL HERE AND SEE IF COUNCIL FELT COMFORTABLE WITH REMANDING THIS TOPIC TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION, LETTING THEM LOOK AT THIS AND SEE IF THOSE PERMITTED USES IN THAT SECTION THAT I MENTIONED ON BROADWAY NEEDED TO BE AMENDED IN ANY WAY TO MAKE THAT MORE SUITABLE TO MAINTAIN THE AMBIANCE OF THAT PARTICULAR AREA, BROADWAY, MOURINE. >> IF WE WERE GOING TO LOOK AT THAT AREA, PERHAPS WE COULD LOOK EVEN AT OTHER AREAS, I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD ALLOW ANYMORE VAPE SHOPS ON THE ISLAND. WHEN I TURN ON THE 61ST STREET AND THAT ONE THAT'S OPEN 24 HOURS A DAY, I'M LIKE, [NOISE] HOW DID WE EVER ALLOW THAT? WE MUST HAVE A VAPE SHOP EVERY THREE FEET, IT SEEMS LIKE. >> DAVID FINKLEA, DAVID. >> MAY I SUPPORT THIS. I THINK THIS IS A REALLY SHORT DISCUSSION. I THINK YOU'RE BRINGING UP AN ISSUE THAT REALLY NEEDS TO BE ADDRESSED IN A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE. MR. MAXWELL DO YOU HAVE ANY UPDATE ON THAT [INAUDIBLE] WE TALKED ABOUT ISSUE RC224? >> I DON'T THINK CHANGE HAS BEEN DONE. >> NO SIR. >> WE'RE STILL IN THE SAME SCHEDULE WE TALKED ABOUT. >> VERY GOOD. WHAT I'D RECOMMEND IS I'LL TAKE COUNCIL MEMBER ROB'S COMMENTS ALONG WITH THE MAYOR'S COMMENTS, MAKE NOTE AND LET'S PUT THAT INTO AS WE START TO DRAFT THE SCOPE DOCUMENT TO HAVE THAT COMPETENCY PLAN, TOOK A LOOK AT THAT. >> WE HAVE JOHN AND THEN DAVID. >> WHAT IS THE AREA THAT YOU DID IN HEAR? >> I HAD MENTIONED 19TH-31ST, IF COUNCIL MAY NOT REMEMBER, I THINK MANY OF THE COUNCIL MEMBERS WERE NOT HERE, WE HAD A BROADWAY DESIGN COMMITTEE. THEY MET FOR A LONG TIME AND THEN [OVERLAPPING] [01:55:01] >> THEY HAD LEFT THAT DOMINO'S. >> LEFT WHAT, I'M SORRY, MARIE? >> THAT DOMINO'S. BUT GO AHEAD. >> IT LOOKS BETTER NOW. >> IT NEVER REALLY CAME BACK WITH ANY DEFINITE RECOMMENDATIONS, BUT THERE WAS A LOT OF DISCUSSIONS BECAUSE FROM 19TH UP TO 6TH STREET, IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN IS A HISTORIC DISTRICT. >> I THINK IT ONLY GOES TO 10TH. >> IS A HISTORIC DISTRICT. THEY HAD TALKED LONG AND HARD ABOUT HAVING DIFFERENT PERMITTED USES FROM 19TH-31ST. THAT IS MORE IN KEEPING, THEY DIDN'T FEEL THAT IT WAS NEEDED TO BE A HISTORIC DISTRICT, BUT MAY NEED TO BE TREATED DIFFERENTLY THAN OTHER SECTIONS IN BROADWAY. >> WELL, I WOULD OPEN UP ALL OF BROADWAY. I MEAN, THERE ARE DESIGN STANDARDS ALL ALONG BROADWAY, OUTSIDE OF THAT AREA THAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT? >> [OVERLAPPING] AND BROADWAY. >> BROADWAY. I DON'T KNOW HOW LONG THAT COMMITTEE MET, BUT IT SEEMED LIKE YEARS. WHAT CAME OUT OF IT, THE PRODUCT THAT WE GOT FROM THOSE DESIGN STANDARDS IS TERRIBLE. >> IT IS. >> WHEN YOU LOOK AT HOW THE JACK IN THE BOX ON 51ST WAS DESIGNED AND HOW THE MCDONALD'S ON 53RD WAS DESIGNED, COMPLETELY AWFUL, AND THOSE THEY HAD TO DO WHAT THEY DID THERE BECAUSE OF THE DESIGN STANDARDS. >> WELL, THE JACK IN THE BOX WAS MORE OF, IF YOU REMEMBER, WE WENT IN AND COUNCIL GAVE THEM HOW THEY WANTED THAT STRUCTURED AT THE JACK IN THE BOX. >> BUT THEY'RE DESIGNED BY US. >> THEY'RE DESIGNED BY COMMITTEE, [LAUGHTER] AND IT'S AWFUL. >> NO, I AGREE. >> IT'S AWFUL. YOU GET TO THAT SECTION OF BROADWAY AND THERE IS NO REASON TO PUT THESE BUILDINGS ON THE STREET, RIGHT UP AGAINST THE STREET. >> IN THAT SECTION. >> YES. >> YES. >> THAT'S HOW WELL. >> THE WHOLE THING IS PLANNED OVER, THE STREET UP TO THE STREET FOR THE PARKING BEHIND IT BECAUSE IT HAD SOME URBAN [OVERLAPPING]. >> I GUESS THE TACO BELL. >> I BRING UP ALL THESE FAST FOOD PLACES BECAUSE THOSE ARE THE NEW STRUCTURES ON [INAUDIBLE] [LAUGHTER] CONSIDERING A SCONE [LAUGHTER]. THANK YOU [LAUGHTER]. >> THE TACO BELL LOOKS VERY NICE. IT'S GOT NICE LANDSCAPING OUT IN FRONT OF IT, IT'S SETBACK AWAY FROM THE STREET. IT IS A MUCH BETTER LOOKING PROJECT. THEN BOTH THAT MCDONALD'S OR THAT JACK IN THE BOX, AND I DON'T KNOW, SO TO MAKE IT LOOK GOOD, THEY HAVE TO PUT THE DRIVEWAY RIGHT UP NEXT TO THE STREET. IT'S JUST TERRIBLE. IT'S ABSOLUTE TERRIBLE. >> BECAUSE THEY MADE BOTH THE PARKING [OVERLAPPING] AND THEN I PUT THE BUILDING RIGHT UP, I MEAN, IT'S HORRIBLE. >>IT IS. >> THAT WAS AN ACCEPTABLE DESIGN STANDARD AT THE TIME, AND THEN IT GOT PAINTED THAT COLOR, AND EVERYBODY WENT, HOW'S THAT ALLOWED? WE DON'T CONTROL THAT, THAT'S HOW. I TAKE WHAT COUNCIL AND FRANKLY SAYS, I ACCEPT THAT WE OUGHT TO THINK ABOUT THIS IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, BUT THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IS A SUGGESTION. IT DOESN'T DIRECTLY DRIVE WHAT WE DO. I WOULD SUPPORT HANDING THIS TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND ASKING HIM TO TAKE THIS ON AS A PROJECT. I THINK WHEN THEY WENT WITH FOOD TRUCK DISCUSSION, TOOK A LONG TIME, BUT I THINK THEY CAME OUT WITH [OVERLAPPING]. BUT I THINK THEY CAME OUT WITH SOME VERY GOOD RECOMMENDATION. >> I WOULD AGREE. >> I THINK FINDING A GOOD PLACE TO SEND THIS, MIKE. >> SOMEBODY MENTIONED SOMETHING ABOUT DEVELOPMENT AT THE 19TH AND BROADWAY. >> TWENTY FIFTH AND BROADWAY. >> WHAT'S LEFT? >> I GOT YOU. I THOUGHT YOU SAID 19TH. I GET YOU. >> WISH TO IMPROVE ON THE QUALITY OF THE CONSTRUCTION [LAUGHTER]. >> CAN WE STILL LIKE THIS UNDER COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DOES BECAUSE I KNOW AT ONE POINT WE STOPPED THE, HAVING ANYMORE, GET YOUR TITLE BACK, THE PAY. >> PAYDAY LOANS. >> PAYDAY LOANS WE LIMITED THOSE. WELL, HOW WOULD WE ADDRESS LIMITING VAPE SHOP? >> IT'S A LEGAL QUESTION, THAT'S NOT ONE I CAN ANSWER. >> WELL, LET'S BRING TIM UP. TIM, COULD YOU COME FORWARD [OVERLAPPING] >> THIS THE PERMISSIBLE ACTIVITIES, ZONING AREAS, AND MY VIEW IS AS LONG AS AN ACTIVITY IS PERMITTED IN THAT AREA, WE'VE ALREADY RULED ON THE ISSUE. >> I KNOW, BUT WE'VE CHANGED THE ONE FOR PAYDAY LOANS. [02:00:02] >> WHERE YOU COULD AMEND THE PERMITTED USES IN THE ZONING CATEGORY. >> TO A DEGREE BECAUSE YOU CAN'T ZONE OUT. >> HAVE A SEAT PLEASE, TIM. >> YOU CAN'T ZONE OUT OF USE, BUT YOU CERTAINLY CAN REGULATE HOW AND WHERE IT OCCURS. >> YES. >> IF YOU SAY A VAPE SHOP ISN'T ALLOWED IN THE COMMERCIAL ZONE, WHERE ELSE WOULD IT BE? IT'S GOT TO BE. >> HEAVY OFF THE ISLAND. >> WHERE EVERYTHING ELSE SMOKES. >> THAT MIGHT BE. >> YOU MEAN YOUR GRANDFATHERED ALL THE EXISTING VAPE SHOPS AND THEY'VE GOT A MONOPOLY ON THE PROPERTY. THAT'S THE DOWNSIDE TO IT, THAT'S THE DOWNSIDE. >> HOW DO WE DO WITH PAY DAY? >> I DON'T THINK WE HAD THAT MANY OF THEM AT THE TIME, SO IT WAS A LITTLE EASIER. >> IT CAME UP ONE OF THE MAP APPLYING. I DON'T FORGET WHERE IT WAS GOING. >> I ALSO BELIEVE THERE WAS SOME STATE RULINGS TO DO WITH THAT OR IF AS I RECALL [OVERLAPPING]. >> REAL STRONG LOBBY, FOR SURE. >> BUT TIM, YOU COULD TAKE [BACKGROUND] COULD PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW THE PERMITTED USES IN THE ZONING CATEGORIES THAT ARE PREVALENT ON BROADWAY. >> ABSOLUTELY, AND ADJUST THE PERMITTED USES IN THOSE CATEGORIES. >> WHY JUST BROADWAY THEN, WHY NOT ANY MAIN ENTRANCE TO THE CITY? >> WELL, WE COULD, BUT I DON'T WANT THEM BITE OFF TOO MUCH RIGHT NOW FOR THE PLANNING. >> SIXTY FIRST ISN'T THAT LONG. >>BUT PERMITTED USES ARE NOT REALLY BY STREET, THEY'RE BY ZONE. IF YOU CHANGE IT IN THAT ZONE, IT'S PROBABLY GOING TO AFFECT 61ST AS WELL. >> WELL, WOULD YOU HAVE TO ENHANCE A GOOD POINT? WOULD YOU HAVE TO SET UP A NEW OVERLAY. >> OVERLAY BASICALLY. >> SMOKING ZONE. [LAUGHTER] >> THAT'D BE THE MEANS BY WHICH YOU DO IT. >> YOU DEVELOP AN OVERLAY FOR THE BROADWAY'S CORRIDOR AREA? >> YEAH. >> THAT'S IT. EXCUSE ME, JOHN. IF WE MAN THIS TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION, I WANT TO BE VERY SPECIFIC ON WHAT WE WANT THEM TO DO. >> BUT I WOULD LIKE US TO LOOK OF BROADWAY AND 61ST. >> IF IT'S BASICALLY A USE ISSUE VERSUS A URBAN DESIGN ISSUE, WHICH DIRECTION DO YOU WANT THEM TO HAVE? >> I DON'T BELIEVE WE HAVE ANY DESIGN STANDARDS ON 61ST STREET. >> NO, WE DO NOT. >> MAYBE WE SHOULD. >> WELL, LET'S NOT BITE OFF EVERYTHING AT ONE TIME, WE'RE BACK TO 2015, THE LDRS. I APPLAUD LET'S TAKE BROADWAY OR THIS SECTION OF BROADWAY, SEE IF WE CAN GET SOME TRACTION THERE, AND THEN IF IT WORKS, WE CAN EXPAND IT TO OTHER AREAS. >> YOU TALK OF THE 19TH TO [OVERLAPPING] THE ARGUMENT. >> HOWEVER, TO ANSWER COUNCIL MEMBER ROB'S QUESTION, IF YOU'D LIKE TO TEST, THE PLANNING COMMISSION WAS LOOKING AT THAT SECTION OF BROADWAY AND SPECIFIC USES, LIKE AS A USE WITHIN DISTRICTS, YOU CAN ADD THAT AS A SEPARATE ITEM FOR THE PLANNING COMMISSION, NOT NECESSARILY ON 61ST STREET OR ON BROADWAY, BUT AS A SPECIFIC USE, PERMITTED USE. >> IN THE ZONES, RIGHT? >> YES, JOHN. >> JIM. IS THERE AN OVERLAY ON BROADWAY RIGHT NOW? >> YES. >> WHERE DOES IT EXTEND TO? >> THE DESIGN STANDARDS OVERLAY IS. >> [INAUDIBLE] >> FROM 59TH? >> 59 [INAUDIBLE] >> I'M HAVING A HARD TIME HEARING CATHERINE. >> CATHERINE, COULD YOU COME HERE. I'M HAVING A HARD TIME TOO. >> THE OVERLAY ZONE, IT GOES FROM 59TH STREET TO 60TH STREET? I'D LIKE TO LOOK AT THAT WHOLE AREA. I'D LIKE TO LOOK AT THE WHOLE LENGTH. >> THE ENTIRE LENGTH OF BROADWAY. >> BROADWAY START WITH A COTTON WAREHOUSES AND WORK THIS ONE. >> A MAIN. >> BUT EVEN THE BIGGEST UNDEVELOPED TRACKER LAND ON BROADWAY IS 59TH TO 53RD. >> IF WE DON'T ADDRESS IT NOW. >> THAT'S RIGHT. >> THEN YOU'D LOSE IT BECAUSE THEN YOU'D HAVE TO GRANDFATHER IN WHATEVER WAS THERE. >> WHICH IS THE SAME THING THAT'S HAPPENING ON 61ST, WHICH IS WHY I WOULD LIKE TO INCLUDE IT AS WELL. >> THE SITE ON 25TH, I BELIEVE, MIGHT HAVE SOME VESTED RIGHTS BECAUSE WE'VE HAD SOME INQUIRIES AND SOME SUBMITTALS. I DON'T KNOW THAT IT'S BEEN A PERMIT SUBMITTAL OF SUCH, MAYBE IT HAS. HAS THAT BEEN? >> SUBMITTED FOR A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT AND THEN WITHDREW IT. >> OKAY. >> WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE CAR WASH? >> YES. >> YEAH. >> COUNCIL, LET'S GIVE SOME WORDING NOW ON WHAT WE WANT THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO, [02:05:01] SO THAT WE CAN BRING THOSE FORWARD, AND JOHN IS OUR LIAISON CAN GUIDE PLANNING COMMISSION ON THIS. I UNDERSTAND MURRAY'S ISSUE WITH 61ST. I DO THINK IT'S A LITTLE TOO MUCH TO BITE OFF IF WE'RE GOING TO DO BROADWAY RIGHT NOW, BUT WE COULD ADDRESS VAPE SHOPS AS RYAN MENTIONED. >> THIS IS TWO YEARS A SEPARATE ISSUE. I THINK WE CAN DO THAT. >> YEAH. WE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE THEM LOOK AT THE ENTIRE STRETCH OF BROADWAY. IS THAT CORRECT? >> DESIGN STANDARDS AND PERMITTED USES? >> PERMITTED USES. >> A SEED THERE AGAIN, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT YOUR TWO MAJOR ACCESS, 61ST IN BROADWAY, MURRAY MAY LOOK AT DESIGN STANDARDS, SO THE 60ST. >> I FEEL WHATEVER. >> I ALWAYS SUGGEST TAKING BROADWAY FIRST AND SEE HOW THE PROCESS GOES WITH THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND THEN IF THEY'RE SUCCESSFUL, WE LIKE THE PROCEEDS, WOULD HAVE THEM GO THROUGH THE PROCESS ON 51ST. >> AT 61ST STREETS ALREADY BUILT OUT. >> THERE'S NO REALLY. >> PRODUCT HAS BEEN KNOCKED DOWN AND GOT AGAIN. >> THERE'S SOME OF THAT. >> YEAH, A LITTLE BIT. >> IT IS. >> NOW WOULD BE THE TIME TO GROUND. >> THAT'S MY DISTRICT AND I WOULD LOVE TO SEE THAT HAPPEN. I DON'T KNOW IF THE TIME IS PERMITS THAT IT'D BE TOUGH TO DO ALL THIS AT ONCE, I THINK, BOTH THESE MAJOR THOROUGHFARES. >> [INAUDIBLE]. >> FOOD TRUCK ISSUE TOOK 13 MEETINGS. >> [INAUDIBLE] WOULD ALREADY BE BECAUSE BROADWAY WILL TAKE CARE FOR LIFETIME. >> YEAH. WE NEED TO TRY TO SPEED THIS PROCESS UP AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE. I DON'T I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU'D DO THAT, BUT I'LL LEAVE THAT UP TO YOU TO. >> IF THIS HAS BROUGHT FORWARD PERMIT USES. >> BECAUSE WHATEVER I CAN DO. >> HOW WE'RE PLANNING COMMISSION ADDRESS THAT. WILL THEY HAVE WORKSHOPS ON THAT. THEY THEN FROM THE WORKSHOPS WOULD HAVE PUBLIC HEARINGS, AND THEN THEY WOULD HAVE ORDINANCES THAT WOULD COME BACK. ORDINANCE CHANGES TO THIS AMENDMENT CHANGES. AMENDMENTS. >> THAT WOULD BE THE TYPICAL PROCESS. >> OKAY. >> NO WHISPERING AT THE TABLE DONE. WHAT WAS DAN SAYING? >> GIVEN A LITTLE OF ADVICE. >> [OVERLAPPING] COUNSELING PLANNING. >> DAN, ARE YOU TELLING US SOMETHING WE NEED TO KNOW OR WHAT? >> THEY ARE SUGGESTING TO TEAM THAT PERHAPS THE PLANNING COMMISSION COULD REVEAL THE CURRENT STANDARDS, COMPILE LIST OF POTENTIAL CHANGES, WHICH THEY COULD BRING BACK TO CITY COUNCIL TO MAKE SURE COUNCIL WAS OKAY WITH PURSUING THOSE. >> YOU CAN HAVE THAT ON OCTOBER'S AGENDA. I'M SORRY [LAUGHTER] >> SURE. [LAUGHTER] >> JOKE. >> INSTEAD OF PLANNING COMMISSION, I ACTUALLY MOVING AND GETTING LEGAL DEPARTMENT INVOLVED WITH CHANGES. THEY WOULD MAKE BRING A RECOMMENDATIONS BACK TO COUNCIL AGAIN. >> AT THIS POINT, INSTEAD OF JUST GIVING THEM A BLANK CHECK, I'M COMING BACK TO YOU AND SAY WE SUGGEST [INAUDIBLE] IS, AND HAVE YOU OKAY RIGHT NOW IF THEY PROCEED ON THOSE AREAS, RATHER THAN SENDING THEM DOWN A 10 MONTH ODYSSEY, AND THEN COMING BACK IN COUNCIL SAYING, WHY DIDN'T YOU DO THIS? >> YEAH. THAT MAKES SENSE. I UNDERSTAND. ARE YOU CLEAR ON THIS THING? >> YEAH, I THINK SO. BROADWAY REVIEW OF THE DESIGN STANDARDS AND THE PERMITTED USES. >> OKAY. >> WE'RE ALSO GOING TO HAVE SOME REVIEW OF, THEY'VE CHANCE. >> THEY'VE CHANCE. >> THEY'VE CHANCE. >> THROUGHOUT THE OTHER ONE. >> MAYOR, I HAVE ONE QUESTION. JUST CLARIFICATION FOR ME. THE HISTORICAL BLOCKS THAT YOU SAID FROM WHAT THEY HAVE, WHAT THEIR PERMITTED USES CHANGE OR WHATEVER, COULD THAT POSSIBLY? >> THEY'RE MOSTLY ZONED RESIDENTIAL. >> OKAY. >> IT WOULD NOT LIKELY TO CHANGE. >> OKAY. >> VERY GOOD. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, COUNCIL? >> DO WE NEED TO PUT A TIMELINE ON THIS FOR THE PLANNING COMMISSION? I JUST FEEL THIS IS SOMETHING THEY CAN PICK UP AND MOVE FORWARD WITH QUICKLY HERE. >> SURE. WE CAN PUT IT ON AND INTRODUCE IT AS A TOPIC AT THEIR NEXT MEETING. >> OKAY. >> BUT WE'RE GETTING STRANGE TO SAY, BUT CLOSE TO THE END OF THE YEAR, SO IT MIGHT BE IN THE NEW YEAR. >> I STILL THINK IT WOULD TAKE A NUMBER OF MEETINGS. IT MAY NOT BE 13TH. IT'LL STILL TAKE. >> I THINK IT YET PROBABLY, 12TH [LAUGHTER]. >> I HAVE [LAUGHTER]. >> I WOULDN'T SAY [INAUDIBLE] YOU COULD SMOKE OUT. [02:10:01] >> IT'S NOT 11 OR12. [LAUGHTER]. >> YOU'RE GETTING WORSE THAN HE IS. >> [LAUGHTER] WE SPENT. >> ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, CATHERINE. THANK YOU, TIM. >> I APPRECIATE THAT. LET'S MOVE TO ITEM 3D, PLEASE. [3.D. Discussion Of The Scope Of The Financial Audit For The Port Of Galveston (Brown - 20 Min)] >> OKAY 3D. DISCUSSION OF THE SCOPE OF THE FINANCIAL AUDIT [LAUGHTER] FOR REPORT AND GALVESTON. >> YET AGAIN. >> COUNCIL, THIS IS ITEM 12B ON OUR AGENDA TONIGHT. THIS AFTERNOON WHEN WE RECONVENE AT 5:00 PM. THIS IS AT OUR LAST MEETING, WE HAD A MOTION TO HIRE AN OUTSIDE AUDIT FIRM FOR AUDITING THE PORT. TODAY, WHAT WE'RE DISCUSSING IS THE SCOPE OF THIS AUDIT THAT WOULD BE GIVEN TO STAFF, SO THAT THEY COULD GO OUT AND THEN ELICIT SUBMITTALS ON AUDITING FIRMS TO PERFORM THIS AND RECEIVING BIDS FOR THAT. I'M GOING TO OPEN THIS UP FOR DISCUSSION. I HAVE SOME IDEAS ABOUT THIS, BUT IF OTHER INDIVIDUALS HAS THOUGHTS, WE CAN START WITH THOSE. I THINK, AND GUIDE ME ON THIS FOR THOSE THAT UNDERSTAND AUDITS BETTER THAN I. AFTER LOOKING AND RESEARCHING THIS AUDIT SITUATION, I'VE TALKED TO DAN ABOUT IT AT LENGTH, I'VE TALKED TO GLENN, AND SO FORTH. IT SEEMS TO ME THAT WHAT WE'RE PROBABLY AFTER IN THE TERMINOLOGIES THAT I WAS GIVEN IS TO HAVE AN AGREED UPON PROCEDURES AUDIT FOR THE COURT. THEN WE WOULD DELINEATE WHAT WE WANTED THEM TO ADDRESS IS IT FAMOUS, IS IT TRAVEL EXPENSES OR THINGS LIKE THAT? BUT I KNOW I'M OPEN TO DISCUSSION ON THAT. THAT'S JUST SOMETHING TO START THIS DISCUSSION WITH. ANY COMMENTS SIR JOHN? >> WHAT IS A PROCEDURAL AUDIT? LIKE HOW THEY INPUTTED, WHAT ARE THEY LOOKING AT FOR PROCEDURES? >> WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, HAVE A SEAT DAN IF YOU WOULD. >> REALLY THE TIME, AND I WAS JUST COMING IN AND SIT OUT THERE. >> WRONG MOVE. THAT'S IT. >> THAT'S ALL RIGHT. >> WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, DAN, I HAD MENTIONED TO COUNCIL AFTER VISITING WITH YOU AND A NUMBER OF OTHER PEOPLE THAT WHAT WE MIGHT WANT TO LOOK AT IS AGREED UPON PROCEDURES AUDIT, AND DELINEATE THOSE ITEMS THAT WE WANT TO ADDRESS. >> THAT WOULD BE THE CORRECT TERMINOLOGY FOR THE TYPE OF WORK WE'RE LOOKING FOR. FINANCIAL AUDIT IS A FINANCIAL AUDIT, WHERE YOU'RE ATTESTING TO THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS THE INSTITUTION, AND AGREED UPON PROCEDURES AUDIT IS WHERE YOU HIRE AN ACCOUNTING FIRM TO GO IN AND LOOK AT A DEFINED SCOPE, WHATEVER THAT MAY BE, YOU WANT THEM TO LOOK AT THIS NARROW AREA, THEIR OPERATION, OR THIS NARROW AREA OF THEIR FINANCES. IF YOU WANT TO GO IN AND LOOK AT THE FEMALE RECEIVABLE, YOU HIRE A FIRM TO GO IN AND TRACE OUT THE FEMALE RECEIVABLE YOU HIRE FOR HIM TO GO IN AND LOOK AT X OR Y. THOSE ARE AGREED UPON PROCEDURES. THEY'RE VERY NARROW IN SCOPE AND THAT IS MOST CONSISTENT WITH INTERNAL AUDIT WORK >> IT'S ALSO NOT THAT THIS IS GUIDING US, BUT ALSO IT'S MORE EFFICIENT FINANCIALLY THAT WAY. >> POTENTIALLY. >> SPEED THINGS UP. >> YEAH. IF DONE CORRECTLY, WHICH I WOULD ANTICIPATE THEY WILL BE, THE EXTERNAL AUDITOR, THE PORT WOULD PLACE RELIANCE ON THAT WORK WHEN THEY DO THEIR FINANCIAL AUDITS SO THEY KNOW THAT THEY CAN LIMIT THE SCOPE IN A CERTAIN AREA BECAUSE IT'S ALREADY BEEN LOOKED AT THROUGH AN AGREED UPON PROCEDURE DONE BY SOMEBODY ELSE. THEY WOULD TAKE THOSE WORK PAPERS AND INCORPORATE THEM AND PROBABLY LIMIT THEIR SCOPE OF ACTIVITY IN THAT ONE AREA. AT THE END OF THE DAY, IT COULD RESULT IN A LESS EXPENSIVE EXTERNAL AUDIT. THE FINANCIAL AUDIT. >> QUESTIONS. >>WE COULD DO A PROCEDURAL AUDIT, FEMALE LIABILITIES DETERMINED AMOUNT OF FEMALE LIABILITIES AT THE PORT OF GALVESTON FOR THE YEARS ENDING IN 2028 OR 2018, 2019 AND 2020. IS THAT'S SPECIFIC ENOUGH? >> I THINK IF YOU GO AND LOOK AT THE FEMALE RECEIVABLE, THEY'RE GOING TO GO BACK TO THE BEGINNING AND BRING IT FORWARD. I DON T KNOW THAT YOU HAVE TO GIVE THEM THE YEARS. THEY'RE JUST GOING TO GO TO THE BEGINNING OF THE RECEIVABLE AND THEY'RE GOING TO FOLLOW IT THROUGH AND THEY'RE IN A TRACEABLE AND KNOW WHAT IT IS TODAY. THEN YOU'RE GOING TO GET TO WHAT IT IS. [02:15:01] TO UNDERSTAND WHAT IT IS TODAY, YOU'VE GOT TO GO BACK AND LOOK. >> TIME-WISE, DAN, LET'S SAY IF WE STARTED WITH THE AGREED UPON PROCEDURES AUDIT AS IT RELATES TO FEMALE LIABILITIES,. >> I COULDN'T GIVE YOU THAT. QUITE HONESTLY. >> WE'RE TALKING. >> YOU COULD SET THAT UP IN YOUR SCOPE THEY'LL CORRECT. >> THEN THAT JUST DRIVES THE PRICE. IF YOU WANT IT DONE IN A SPECIFIC PERIOD OF TIME, THAT'S GOING TO COST YOU. >> I WOULD THINK THAT WOULD BE LIKE SIX MONTHS. >> PARDON ME? >> I SAID I WOULD THINK IT WOULD BE LIKE SIX MONTHS BECAUSE IT'D BE GIVE BACK AND YOU REVIEW ALL THOUGH. >> I CAN'T IMAGINE. >> WELL, IF YOU'D GO BACK BECAUSE EVERY EVERY YEAR THE ADA HAS DONE A FINANCIAL AUDIT AND THEY HAVE AN AUDIT OF ALL FEDERAL, STATE, AND FEDERAL ITEMS. >> TIMING IS IMPORTANT TOO, BECAUSE YOU REMEMBER, ONCE YOU HIT CLOSE CALENDAR YEAR, THESE FIRMS GET REALLY BUSY IN THE SPRING. WE'RE HITTING THEM AT THE RIGHT TIME. WE CAN MAYBE GET SOME THINGS DONE ACCOMPLISHED AND WE HAVE TO TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION AND DAN BROUGHT THE I KEEP BRINGING DOWN INTO THIS DAN AND BROUGHT THIS TO MY ATTENTION. THESE AUDITS TIE UP AN ORGANIZATION. >> THEY DO? >> YOU DON'T WANT TO GO OVER THERE AND SHUT THEM DOWN ON THEIR OPERATIONS WHILE WE'RE TRYING TO DO THESE AUDITS AND MAYOR WHAT THEY TYPICALLY DO IS ONCE YOU DEVELOP A SCOPE YOUR CONTRACT WITH THEM TO DO IT, THEY'LL DO A RECORDS REQUEST AND THEY'LL SAY, HEY, THESE ARE THE RECORDS WE'RE GOING TO NEED TO DO OUR VIEW. WHEN IT GETS RECORDS READY, THEY'D COME IN SOME OTHER WORK THERE'LL BE ABLE TO DO OFF-SITE, SOME OF THE WORK DON'T HAVE TO DO ONSITE TO INTERVIEW OR DO WHATEVER. BUT IT'S A COMBINATION OF JUST THEIR SCOPING WORK AND THEN HOW MUCH TIME THEY PHYSICALLY HAVE TO SPEND OUTSIDE. THE BETTER YOU DEFINE THE SCOPE AND THE BETTER YOU DO ON YOUR RECORDS REQUESTS, THE LESS TIME THE INTRUDING INTO THE OPERATION OF THE ORGANIZATION. >> ANY OTHER COMMENTS? YES, JOHN. >> WERE THERE SOME OTHER PURCHASING TO SEE IF THE WORDS ARE BIDDING PROPERLY AND USING COMPETITIVE BIDS? >> YEAH, THAT'S ANOTHER ONE, JUST SCOPE IT. THEY'D PICK SOME SAMPLE PERIODS. IF THEY WANTED TO GO BACK ONE YEAR, THEY MIGHT TAKE THREE MONTHS OF A YEAR. IF YOU GO BACK TWO YEARS, I MIGHT TAKE A COUPLE OF MONTHS OUT OF EACH YEAR AND TRY TO LOOK AT THE LARGER CONTRACTS AND MORE MATERIAL CONTRACTS AND SEE IF THEY WERE ALL BID AND AWARDED PROPERLY. >> THEY FIND THE ERRORS, THEY MOVE ON. IF THEY FIND AN ERROR, THEY STICK A LITTLE DOWN. >> THEN THE CHECKS WRITTEN AND CLEARED BANKS FROM THE LAW CASH YET YOU HAVEN'T GO IN AND LOOK AT YOUR CASH RECONCILIATIONS AND YOUR CASH ACCOUNTS. ANOTHER, JUST DEFINE THE SCOPE. THOSE ARE ALL VERY TRADITIONAL AND SIMPLE THINGS TO GET DONE. >> IF WE DID A AGREED UPON PROCEDURES AUDIT AS IT RELATES TO FEMALE LIABILITIES, PROCUREMENT AND CASH. >> DAVID HAS HER HAND UP MAYOR. >> CHECKS AND CASHFLOW. >> CHECKS. HOW LONG DOES THAT TAKE? THAT WOULD ADD MORE AND MORE TIME TOO. >> WE'RE SPECULATING ON TIME. >> THAT'S UP TO THE FIRM, IS THE FIRM AND HOW MANY RESOURCES THEY POUR INTO IT, THE MORE YOU PAY, THE MORE RESOURCES THEY CAN APPLY TO IT AND IT'S SHORTER THAN GET IT DONE. >> YES, DAVID GO AHEAD. DAVID FINKLEA. >> AS IT RELATES TO CASH MANAGEMENT AND YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT WHITMAN COLORED SHAPES. I'M JUST GOING TO THROW THIS OUT THERE FOR COUNCIL TO CONSIDER. SHOULD WE ALSO BE LOOKING AT TO CASH MANAGEMENT AS IT RELATES TO THEIR PARKING MANAGEMENT PROGRAM? >> WITH A PARKING WE'VE ALREADY KEPT IN GLEN BUG ARRHENIUS AUDIT PLAN. >> THANK YOU. I'M GOOD. >> I WOULD THINK THAT CHECK THING WOULD NOT A HUGE AMOUNT OF TIME BECAUSE AT EACH AND EVERY WORD SPORT, MEANING THEY HAVE A COPY OF THE REGISTER WITH FULL EXPLANATIONS. I'VE EVERY CHECK THAT'S BEEN WRITTEN AND I ACTUALLY THINK THAT IT'D BE REDUNDANT, BUT IF THAT'S WHAT YOU ALL WOULD LIKE, WE CAN JUST KEEP IT ON MONEY. >> MIKE BROUGHT UP THREE THINGS. THERE'S ABOUT FIVE BULLET POINTS IN YOUR RECOMMENDATION FOR CONSIDERATION >> THAT WAS A CONDENSED VERSION OF 10. >> THAT'S RIGHT. >> COMBINED INTO FIVE. >> WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THREE HERE. ARE YOU ALL SUGGESTING THESE OTHER AREAS AS WELL OR? >> THOSE WOULD BE TRADITIONAL WITH THAT IS IS JUST A CONSOLIDATION OF TRADITIONAL INTERNAL AUDIT AREAS THAT YOU'D LOOK AT. NOT NECESSARILY GOING TO DO THEM ALL TO POOR DIET AND YOU'RE NOT GOING TO GET ALL THOSE ACCOMPLISHED IN A SIX-MONTH PERIOD, PROBABLY NOT EVEN A 12 MONTH PERIOD, THAT'S A COUPLE OF YEAR AUDIT. >> [OVERLAPPING] GET ALL OF THAT. >> TO ITS FIVE-YEAR. [02:20:01] >> BULLET POINTS? >> YEAH. YOU LOOK AT EACH ONE OF THOSE BULLET POINTS CAN BECAUSE OF THE CONSOLIDATION, THEY CAN INCLUDE A COUPLE OF DIFFERENT INTERNAL AUDITS. >> DAVID. >> ONE OF THEM IS FEMALE LIABILITIES, SO WE WRITE THAT. >> ONE OF THEM IS FOR CONTROLS AND PROCESSES IS RELATED TO TRAVEL. I'M NOT REALLY CONCERNED WITH THAT ONE MUCH. >> ME EITHER. >> PROCUREMENT PROCESSES, WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THAT AND THEN THE OTHER TWO HERE ARE CONTROLLED PROCESS RELATED TO CRUISE PARKING. GLENN'S ALREADY DOING THAT. REVIEWED PORT BUDGET CHANGES, AMENDMENTS, MAINTENANCE, GENERAL LEDGER, AND ACCOUNTING FOR ITS CAPITAL ASSETS ABOUT A COMPLIANCE AND STANDARD INTERNAL CONTROLS. >> BUT WHAT THAT IS GETTING INTO AS ASSET HAS BEEN PROPERLY VALUED, IS THERE A CONSISTENT DEPRECIATION OF THOSE ASSETS IF THEY'VE BEEN REVALUED. THAT'S JUST A TEST. YOUR EXTERNAL FINANCIAL AUDITOR MAY HAVE DONE SOME OF THAT WORK, PROBABLY HAS DONE SOME OF THAT WORK. >> IF WE GO THROUGH AND LOOK AT THEIR EXTERNAL AUDITS, A LOT OF THAT HAS BEEN DONE. >> SOME OF IT IS JUST ONGOING. AT THE END OF THE DAY, IF THE IDEA IS FOR THE PORT TO HAVE ITS OWN INTERNAL AUDIT FUNCTION, THESE THINGS ARE GOING TO BECOME STANDARD AT THE PORT FOR AND REPORT TO THE TRUSTEES AND AN ONGOING BASIS, AND THEN THE CITY CAN JUST PLACE RELIANCE ON THOSE INTERNAL AUDIT REPORTS AND WE CAN LOOK AT THEM AFTER THEY DO THEM. >> IT SOUNDS LIKE WE HAVE OUR ISSUES COVERED HERE. >> BEFORE WE MOVE FORWARD, JOHN, I WANT TO READ THOSE BACK TO YOU SO WE ALL ARE TALKING THE SAME THING. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT AGREED UPON PROCEDURES AUDITS FOR AS IT RELATES TO FEMALE LIABILITIES, PROCUREMENT AND CASH MANAGEMENT AND RECONCILIATION. IS THAT RIGHT? >> YEAH. >> DAVID. >> HOW DO WE EXTEND THIS AT BOARD BECAUSE OF THIS A GOOD IDEA FOR THE BOARD'S GOOD IDEA FOR THE PARK BOARD. WE JUST HAVE TO WRITE THIS IN DIFFERENTLY BECAUSE I THINK THIS WILL BE PART OF THE INTER LOCAL AGREEMENT GOING FORWARD. >> WE CAN CERTAINLY ENTERTAINING, BUT IT'S PART OF THE INNER LOCAL. I THINK IN BOTH PLACES WHERE WE HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO DO THIS, IT'S COUNSELORS WILL TO DO IT. I THINK THAT VIA THE INNER LOCAL DEPARTMENT, WE HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO DO IT I THINK. VIA THE CHARTER, WE HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO DO IT AT THE BOARD ALREADY. THIS IS JUST THE APPETITE OF COUNCIL TO DO IT AND GIVE US A DIRECTION. >> THAT'S THE FIRST THING I'D LIKE TO SEE JUST END PARK BOARD AS WELL. >> ON THE AGENDA. WE DID AGREE. >> I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THAT, I'M OKAY. >> WE COULD PUT THAT IN THE MOTION. >> NO, YOU CAN'T PUT IT IN THE MOTION. WHY WOULD YOU? >> I DON'T BELIEVE IT'S POSTED CORRECTLY. >> THAT'S RIGHT. WE JUST STOP HERE. >> PUT IT ON THE AGENDA. [OVERLAPPING] >> IF IT'S COUNCILS WILL, WE CAN PUT THAT IN THE INTER LOCAL BECAUSE WE TALKED THROUGH THE INTER LOCAL WITH APART BOARD. >> WE MIGHT BE ABLE TO DO THAT, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE SCENARIO IN THE INTER LOCAL BECAUSE THIS IS THE THING I THINK YOU WERE SAYING THIS IS FOR BOTH [OVERLAPPING] >> I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THIS. >> BOTH ENTITIES. >> AS WELL. >> THAT'S WHAT GLENN DOES. THAT'S WHAT GLENN'S ROLE IS, TO DO THIS. >> BUT IT IS INTRIGUING WHEN YOU LOOK AT IT, [OVERLAPPING] I SAID, THE SUBJECT NOW, BUT THERE IS NOTHING FOR INTERNAL CONTROLS FOR SUNDAY, $700,000 TO A FISSURE THAT ISN'T IN THE AUDIT PLAN. >> LET'S LET DAVID FINISH. YOU START AGAIN DAVID. >> BECAUSE AS YOU SAID, ONCE YOU GET SOME OF THIS DONE, THEN YOU HAVE THESE PROCEDURES, YOU KNOW HOW THIS WORKS AND IT COULD REMAIN AS INTERNAL CONTROLS IN BOTH THESE ORGANIZATIONS. WE HAVE THAT FOR THE CITY. SECONDLY, THE SCOPE OF THIS IS IMPORTANT BECAUSE THIS WAS KICKED OFF BECAUSE OF THE CURRENT BOND ISSUE IN THE MOTION. WE'RE GOING TO BE FACING THAT PROBABLY SOONER THAN LATER FOR PURE 16, NO GUARANTEES, BUT WE COULD BE LESS THAN A YEAR FROM NOW, SOME OF US, LOOKING AT THIS ISSUE, A REPEAT FOR A LARGER AMOUNT OF MONEY AS SOON AS NINE MONTHS FROM NOW. YOU DON'T WANT TO GO ON ALL THAT OUT THERE. IT'S GOING TO TAKE YOU TWO YEARS TO COMPLETE AND THEN TRY TO HAVE A HUNDRED-MILLION-DOLLAR DISCUSSION HALFWAY THROUGH THAT PROCESS. >> ABSOLUTELY. >> I THINK WHAT WE'VE IDENTIFIED IN THIS AUDIT WILL NOT TAKE LONG BECAUSE IF YOU GO IN AND YOU PULL DOWN ALL THEIR AUDIT PLANS, YOU CAN SEE A LOT OF THIS HAS ALREADY BEEN DONE BY TWO DIFFERENT AUDITORS. >> WE'RE GOING TO HAVE IT LOOKED AT FROM SOMEBODY OUTSIDE. THAT'S THE WHOLE IDEA HERE. MAYBE WITH THE PIN CAN DO IT. BUT IF IT'S TOO LARGE AND WE HAVE TO GO OUTSIDE, THAT ADDS TIME TO THE PROBLEM. IF YOU EXPAND THE SCOPE OF THE AUDIT THAT ADDS TIME TO IT AND IF YOU WIND UP TALKING ABOUT THIS NEXT MAY, [02:25:01] NEXT JUNE, JULY, YOU COULD BE LATE. >> THE PLAN WOULD BE FOR ME TO HAVE IT ALL DONE WELL BEFORE THEN. >> WE WILL, BUT THOSE ARE MITIGATING FACTORS. YOU HOPE TO DO THAT. BUT THE PRICE COMING BACK TO COUNCIL WITH IT, SO FORTH. >> THROUGH HIS PLAN, HOW LONG WILL IT TAKE TO BUILD THIS UP? >> AGAIN, DAVID'S HANDS UP, MAYOR, I DON'T KNOW IF. >> WE HAVE JOHN. >> OUR INITIAL THOUGHT IS IF WHITLEY PENN IS ALREADY UNDER CONTRACT WITH THE CITY, IF THEY CAN DO THE WORK, THAT MAY BE AN EXPEDITED WAY TO GO. OTHER THAN THAT, WE PUT IT OUT FOR BID. I THINK YOU'RE PROBABLY LOOKING AT A MINIMUM OF 60 DAYS. >> OKAY. >> BEFORE WE COULD HAVE WARRANTS. >> BEFORE YOU AWARD IT. NOT TO DO THE AUDIT BUT TO AWARD. >> I THINK THAT'S WHY IT'S IMPORTANT TO SEE IF WHERE THE BANK CAN DO IT. >> WE HAVE JOHN PAUL AND THEN DAVID FINKLEA. JOHN. >> WITHIN THAT AUDIT, THE SCOPE OF THE WORK THAT THE AUDIT YOU BRING UP A GOOD POINT ABOUT THE PORT'S DEBT, WOULD IT BE AN AUDIT THAT WE WOULD PERFORM IF WE WANTED TO LOOK AT THEIR DEBT RATIO? >> I CAN CALCULATE ALL THAT FOR YOU. YOU DON'T HAVE TO HIRE ANYBODY TO DO THAT. >> IT'S ALL OUT THERE. >> [LAUGHTER] OF COURSE. I'VE HEARD THE NUMBER IS ONE THING AND I'VE HEARD SOMETHING ELSE. WE HAVE THAT INFORMATION, WE COULD COME UP WITH THAT. >> ALL DIDN'T GET IT ALL FROM THEIR FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND ARE AUDITED FINANCIAL REPORTS. WE CAN GET IT ALL. >> IT'S ALL PUBLIC. >> I REALIZE THAT, BUT THAT'S ALSO WHY WE'RE DOING AN AUDIT TO CONFIRM STUFF. >> IF YOU'RE QUESTIONING THE VALIDITY OF THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS, THAT'S SOMETHING DIFFERENT. I CAN GIVE YOU INFORMATION BASED ON THE AUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENT AND THEY'RE PUBLISHED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS. IF THERE'S SOMETHING BEHIND THERE THAT YOU'RE TRYING TO DETERMINE IF THEY ARE ACCURATE OR NOT, THAT'S SOMETHING DIFFERENT. >> THAT IS WHAT WE'RE DOING HERE. I THINK WHEN COUNCIL MEMBER ROB WAS TALKING ABOUT IT, YOU CAN JUST GO GET THERE IS THAT'S NOT WHAT AN AUDITING FIRM IS GOING TO DO. THEY'RE GOING TO REVALIDATE IT. THEY'RE GOING TO MAKE SURE THAT THE REPORT THAT WAS PRODUCED ACCURATELY REFLECTS WHAT THE RECORDS INDICATE. >> THAT'S RIGHT. >> DO WE THINK THAT WOULD BE IMPORTANT IF THEY'RE GOING TO COME BACK TO US AND ASK FOR ANOTHER $100 MILLION? BECAUSE THAT IS APPROACHING A DEBT LIMIT. >> THE BIG THING FROM US IS TO MAKE SURE THAT THESE ARE ALL BASICALLY REVENUE BONDS. TO MAKE SURE THERE'S SUFFICIENT REVENUE TO REPAY THEM. THAT THE TERMS ARE CONSISTENT WITH WHATEVER CONTRACTS ARE CREATING THE REVENUE. IF YOU'VE GOT THAT MATCH, THAT'S THE BIGGEST HURDLE TO OVERCOME. THE REST IS JUST THE OVERALL FINANCIAL CONDITION AND CONTROLS. >> THEY'RE NOT SECURING ANY OF THIS WITH ASSETS? >> RIGHT? >> DAVID FINKLEA. DAVID? >> JOHN, I WANT TO FOLLOW UP ON THAT. I LIKE THE IDEA OF MAYBE ASKING DAN TO GO TAKE A LOOK AT THAT FIRST AND JUST TO CONFIRM THEIR SERVICE OBLIGATIONS SO THAT WE, AS COUNCIL UNDERSTAND THAT WHEN WE START LOOKING FORWARD TO THE NEXT STEP, THE REVENUE BOND ISSUE. MY OTHER POINT IS THAT SHE JUST LEFT THE ROOM AND COUNCIL MEMBER ROB JUST MENTIONED SOMETHING THAT WE'VE EXPANDED THE POPPING OFF OF THAT. WE'VE GONE FROM THE AWARDS BOARD AUDIT PLAN. LOOKS LIKE WE'RE GOING TO BE MOVING FORWARD POTENTIALLY IN BRINGING FORWARD AN OPERATIONAL AUDIT FOR THE PARK'S BOARD AND NOW THAT ONE. IF I REMEMBER CORRECTLY, THOSE TWO ARE GOING TO BE DONE WITH EXTERNAL THIRD-PARTY AUDITORS. IS THAT YOUR RECOMMENDATION ON THE PARK'S BOARD AS WELL? >> CORRECT. >> THEN COUNCILMAN ROB SAID, IF WE'RE DOING THOSE TWO, WE REALLY NEED TO TAKE A LITTLE HARD WORK AT THE CITY OF GALVESTON. THEN I HEARD A COMMENT JUST FOR CLARIFICATION, THAT'S WHAT OUR INTERNAL AUDITOR DOES AND SO I'D LIKE TO SUGGEST THAT YES, ABSOLUTELY. WE NEED TO BE ABSOLUTELY TRANSPARENT IN ALL THREE ORGANIZATIONS IN PERFORMING THESE OPERATIONAL AUDITS. MY QUESTION IS, DOES OUR CITY AUDITOR'S PLAN IN 2024 ADEQUATELY ADDRESS OUR CONCERNS FOR AN OPERATIONAL AUDIT IN 2024? THERE'S JUST A QUESTION OUT THERE. THE COUNTER-QUESTION IS THAT SHOULD WE CONSIDER AN INDEPENDENT THIRD-PARTY AUDITOR FOR THE CITY OF GALVESTON? IN OTHER WORDS, IF WE'RE ASKING OUR OTHER TWO ENTITIES TO GO OUT WITH INDEPENDENT THIRD-PARTY AUDITORS, SHOULD WE BE CONSIDERING THE SAME LEVEL OF CARE OR THE CITY? >> THAT'S WHY WE HAVE AN INTERNAL AUDITOR. >> YOU'RE BEING DUPLICITOUS IN WHAT YOU'RE PAYING FOR. >> RIGHT? >> IF YOU HAVE AN INTERNAL AUDITOR, THE NEED FOR A THIRD-PARTY AUDITOR ISN'T THERE. >> COUNCIL, LET ME JUST MENTION. >> WE HAVE A THIRD-PARTY AUDITOR. >> FINANCIAL AUDIT? >> FINANCIAL STATEMENT AUDITOR. >> MAY I? I'M SORRY. >> WELL, LET ME JUST GUIDE THE COUNCIL. THE ITEM ON OUR AGENDA IS FOR [02:30:01] THE PORT AUDIT IS NOT FOR THE CITY OR PART BOARDS, BUT GO AHEAD DAVID. >> I'LL JUST SAY THE DIFFERENCE IS THOSE ENTITIES DO NOT HAVE THEIR OWN IN-HOUSE AUDITORS. >> CORRECT. >> IT MAKES A DIFFERENCE. THAT'S WHY GLENN REPORTS TO COUNCIL, NOT TO MANAGEMENT. YOU HAVE THAT EXTERNAL LOOK. >> VERY GOOD. JOHN. >> AUDITS. YOU BROUGHT UP REVENUE BONDS AND IT CONTRACTS ASSOCIATED WITH THOSE REVENUE BONDS. DO WE AUDIT THOSE CONTRACTS? >> CITY? >> YES. >> NO. >> WE DON'T REALLY SIGN THOSE CONTRACTS. >> WE DON'T. >> BUT THAT'S BEING ISSUED IN OUR NAME FOR THE PORT BECAUSE THERE ARE ASSETS AND IT'S OUR PORT. BUT THE REPAYMENT STREAM IS PURELY REVENUE GENERATED BY THIS ISSUANCE NOW IS GOING TO BE FROM CARNIVAL. THAT'S WHERE THE REPAYMENT WILL COME FROM AND IT'S NOT PORT REVENUE, BASICALLY, IT'S FEES CHARGED TO THE PASSENGERS. THOSE ARE GOING TO BE THE SERVICES THAT CAN BE CREATED. >> BUT IF WE DO AN AUDIT OF THOSE CONTRACTS, HOW DO WE ENSURE THAT THOSE FEES ARE CORRECT AND THAT WE ARE BEING AND THE REVENUE IS SUFFICIENT TO PAY BACK THE BONDS? >> BUT THESE ARE PUBLICLY OFFERED DOCUMENTS. >> I KNOW THAT. >> THERE'S OBLIGATIONS AND EVERYBODY'S GOING TO BE DOING THEIR DUE DILIGENCE. ANYBODY THAT BUYS A BOND, IT'S GOING TO BE AN INSTITUTIONAL INVESTOR. THEY'VE BEEN WILLING TO PERFORM THEIR DUE DILIGENCE TO MAKE SURE THAT THESE CONTRACTS ARE IN PLACE. EVERYBODY THAT'S INVOLVED IN THAT TRANSACTION KNOWS THAT WE'RE NOT A PARTY TO THE TRANSACTION OTHER THAN THE FACT THAT WE OWN THE PORT. >> WHO DOES LOOK OVER THOSE CONTRACTS WITHIN THAT BOND SALE? >> IT'S GOING TO BE, PROBABLY EVERY PERSON, INCLUDING THE INSTITUTIONAL INVESTORS THAT DO THAT. THE RATING AGENCIES ARE GOING TO LOOK AT THOSE CONTRACTS. >> BOND COUNCIL? >> YOU'VE GOT BOND COUNCIL ON BOTH SIDES. YOU'VE GOT THE ATTORNEYS FOR THE CITY, BEAR WALLACE, YOU HAVE THE ATTORNEY FOR THE PORT. THEN YOU HAVE THE VARIOUS INVESTMENT ADVISORS. THERE'S A VERY LARGE GROUP. YOU SEE THE EMAIL CHAINS, PROBABLY 4-5 LINES OF EVERYONE THAT'S INVOLVED IN THIS TRANSACTION. >> I GUESS WE AS THE CITY, ARE- >> ARE YOU ASKING ABOUT THE CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTS? >> I'M TALKING ABOUT THE CONTRACT DRIVING THE REVENUE CONTRACT. >> YES. >> I GUESS THAT'S ENOUGH TO SATISFY US. >> I CAN PROMISE YOU WOULD BE ENOUGH TO SATISFY AN INVESTOR BEFORE THEY PUT THEIR MONEY ON BECAUSE THEY'RE BANKING ON GETTING THAT MONEY BACK WITH A [OVERLAPPING]. >> WITH SCC AS WELL AND OTHER FEDERAL. >> DECIDE ON THE COUNCIL IS 12B THIS AFTERNOON. MIKE HAS GIVEN ME HIS LIST HERE. IT'S IN KEEPING WITH WHAT WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT, SO WE CAN BRING THAT FORWARD AS WE COME FORWARD FOR OUR MOTION THIS AFTERNOON. ANY OTHER THOUGHTS ON THIS SUBJECT? THANK YOU VERY MUCH. VERY GOOD. ITEM 3E, PLEASE? [3.E. Discussion Of The Trustee Approved FY 2024 Park Board Budget As Submitted For Council Review And Approval (M. Loftin/C. Ludanyi - 20 Min)] >> 3E DISCRETION OF THE TRUSTEE APPROVED FY 2024 PARK WORD BUDGET AS SUBMITTED FOR COUNCIL REVIEW AND APPROVAL. >> THIS IS ITEM 10B. SHEILA, COME ON UP IF YOU WOULD. THIS IS ITEM 10B ON OUR AGENDA THIS AFTERNOON AND I WANT TO GUIDE COUNCIL ON THIS PARTICULAR ITEM ON THE PART BOARD BUDGET. 10B CONCERNS THE BUDGET OF THE PARK BOARD AND THE HOT CONTRACT WITH THE PART BOARD AND THESE HAVE TO BE APPROVED BOTH FOR US TO MOVE FORWARD. STATE LAW IS WE CAN ALLOCATE FUNDS, OF COURSE, TO THE PART BOARD WITHOUT HAVING A CONTRACT IN PLACE. WHEN WE DISCUSSED THIS ITEM THIS AFTERNOON, WE'LL BE TALKING ABOUT BOTH THE HIRE CONTRACT AND THE BUDGET ITSELF. SAYING THAT I'M GOING TO TURN THIS OVER TO SHEILA. SHEILA. >> I'M GOING TO INTRODUCE MYSELF AS WELL. MY NAME IS SHEILA [INAUDIBLE] AND I AM STARTING OCTOBER 1ST GOING TO BE THE NEW FINANCE DIRECTOR FOR GALVESTON. >> SO GOOD ABOUT THAT. >> TODAY I'M HERE TO PROVIDE YOU ALL WITH THE REVIEW THAT THE FINANCE DEPARTMENT HAS DONE OF THE PARK BOARD ADOPTED BUDGET. THIS IS TO ASSIST COUNCIL IN MAKING A DECISION ON THE FUNDING AND THE AGREEMENTS FOR HOT, AS WELL AS THE APPROVAL OF THEIR BUDGET. SO YOU HAVE IN FRONT OF YOU THE SLIDE DECK AS WELL. IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS. I BELIEVE COUNCILMAN LEE HAS RECEIVED IT VIA EMAIL? >> YES, HE HAS. >> JUST TO REVIEW WHAT OUR OBJECTIVES WERE, AS WE DID THIS, IT'S IMPORTANT TO RECOGNIZE THAT THE PARK BOARD HAS [02:35:03] TWO PRIMARY FUNCTIONS THAT ARE SEPARATE AND DIFFERENT. THE FIRST IS RECEDING, ALLOCATING, AND IMPLEMENTING THE HOTEL OCCUPANCY TAX THAT IS DESIGNATED FOR THEIR USE, WHICH IS FOUR LOCAL PENNIES AND TWO-STATE PENNIES. THEY ALSO MANAGE THE PARKS SEPARATELY. THESE ARE FUNDED BY BEACH USER FEES AND OTHER RELATED REVENUE. BUT THE BUDGET CONTEMPLATES ALL OF THESE TOGETHER. BUT SOME OF THE DECISIONS COUNCIL MAKES ARE SEPARATE JUST TO HOT OR THE PARKS. THE ENTIRE COMPONENT THAT IS RELATED TO HOT TAX IS CONTROLLED BY CHAPTER 351, AND THAT IS WHAT REQUIRES THAT COUNCIL APPROVE THE BUDGET IN ORDER TO ALLOCATE THESE FUNDS TO THE DESIGNATED CONTRACTOR. THE REVIEW AND APPROVAL PROCESS WILL ALLOW COUNCIL TO UNDERSTAND THE REVENUE LEVELS THAT ARE BEING ALLOCATED RELATED TO HOT. IT WILL ESTABLISH THE AMOUNTS OF HOT THAT THE CITY IS GOING TO BE PROVIDING TO THE PARK BOARD IN THIS FISCAL YEAR FROM OCTOBER 1 UNTIL SEPTEMBER 30TH NEXT YEAR. IT WILL ALSO APPROVE THE ALLOCATIONS FOR NON-HOT-RELATED AND HOT-RELATED SERVICE AREAS. THE AREAS OF FOCUS THAT WE LOOKED AT IN THE BUDGET ITSELF WAS RELATED TO FUND BALANCE. WE'RE GOING TO LOOK AT SOME EXAMPLES OF THAT. IT WAS RELATED TO HOT. THERE ARE FOUR FUNDS IN THE PARK BOARD OR IN THE PARK BOARD ACCOUNTING THAT ARE RELATED TO HOT TAX, WHICH IS TOURISM, BEACH PATROLS, BEACH CLEANING, AND NOURISHED BEACH. WE'RE GOING TO LOOK AT THOSE. THEN ONE OF THE THINGS WE WERE LOOKING AT IS HOW WE RECEIVE THE INFORMATION IN OUR BUDGETS AND WHAT'S THE BEST WAY TO UNDERSTAND WHAT'S GOING ON. SO WE ALSO LOOKED AT THE INTER-FUND TRANSFER PRESENTATION, SPECIAL AND CAPITAL PROJECTS TO UNDERSTAND HOW MUCH OF THIS BUDGET IS RELATED TO THOSE ACTIVITIES. WE LOOKED AT PERSONNEL COSTS AND AT THE TIME OF OUR LAST MEETING WITH PARK BOARD STAFF, WE REQUESTED ADDITIONAL INFORMATION RELATED TO THE PERSONNEL PRESENTATIONS AND WE RECEIVED SOME OF THAT YESTERDAY AFTERNOON AND THEY CAN MAYBE SPEAK MORE TO THAT IF I DON'T GET INTO AS MUCH DETAIL. THEN WE ALSO REQUESTED THAT IN FUTURE PRESENTATIONS RELATED TO ANY FEMA AND GRANT FUNDING, THEY SHOW BOTH THE REVENUE AND EXPENDITURES NOT JUST THE NET AMOUNT, SO THAT WE CAN UNDERSTAND WHAT'S GOING ON A LITTLE BETTER. LET'S TALK ABOUT FUND BALANCE PRESENTATION FOR A MOMENT. THE WAY FUND BALANCE IS NORMAL FUNCTION, THIS IS THE CASH THAT ANY GOVERNMENT ENTITY HAS ON HAND. IT'S SOMETHING THAT'S CALCULATED IN ANY GOVERNMENT BUDGET AND THERE IS A BEST PRACTICES FOR HOW THAT'S DONE. THE PARK BOARD, AFTER WE MET WITH THEM SEVERAL TIMES, HAS AGREED THAT OUR PROPOSAL FOR HOW IT SHOULD BE PRESENTED IS HELPFUL TO THEM AS WELL IN THEIR DECISION-MAKING. YOU'LL BE SEEING SOMETHING SIMILAR TO THIS IN FUTURE BUDGETS THAT THEY PRESENT. THERE ARE TWO TYPES OF FUNDS THAT ARE CONTEMPLATED IN A FINANCIAL AUDIT, WHICH IS GOVERNMENTAL AND PROPRIETARY. YOUR GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS HAVE VARIOUS REVENUE SOURCES THAT ALLOW YOU TO DO CERTAIN OPERATIONAL THINGS USUALLY, AND YOUR PROPRIETARY FUNDS ARE ALL RUN LIKE A BUSINESS, EACH FUND IS A BUSINESS IN AND OF ITSELF. THE STARTING POINT FOR CALCULATING FUND BALANCE IS ALWAYS GOING TO BE WHAT THE FINANCIAL REPORT WITH THE AUDIT SAYS IS THE CASH POSITION IN ANY FUND AT THE END OF THAT YEAR. WE HAVE UTILIZED THE PARK BOARD ANNUAL COMPREHENSIVE FINANCIAL REPORT FROM 2022, WHICH WAS SEPTEMBER 30TH, '22, A YEAR AGO, AND THE APPROVED BUDGET TO GET TO THESE CALCULATIONS. THAT IS ESSENTIALLY BEST PRACTICES FOR ANY BUDGET. IT'S HOW THE CITY'S BUDGET IS DONE AS WELL. UNDER THE GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS, THEY HAVE SEVEN, REALLY SIX BECAUSE SAND REPLACEMENT ISN'T AN ACT OF FUND RIGHT NOW. THE BLUE ONES YOU'LL SEE ARE HOT FUNDS SPECIFICALLY. YOU'LL SEE GENERAL FUND AND DEBT SERVICE ARE NOT FUNDED SOLELY BY HOT BUT TOURISM, BEACH CLEANING, BEACH PATROL, AND NOURISHED BEACH ARE. AT SEPTEMBER 30TH OF LAST YEAR, YOU SEE THE FUND BALANCE THAT WAS AUDITED AND ACCEPTED IN THE AUDIT FOR THE PARK BOARD, AND THEN WE'VE USED THEIR BUDGET NUMBERS WHICH YOU ALL RECEIVED THE BUDGET VIA EMAIL FOR THE PROJECTED REVENUE AND EXPENDITURES IN EACH OF THESE FUNDS, AND THEN THE FUND BALANCE AS OF SEPTEMBER 30TH THIS MONTH, PROJECTED, AND THEN THEIR REVENUE AND EXPENDITURE REQUESTS FOR THIS COMING FISCAL YEAR, WHICH IS PART OF WHAT'S BEING APPROVED, AND THEN A FINAL ENDING PROJECTED FUND BALANCE AT 09/30/2024 BASED ON ALL THAT ACTIVITY. IN THE GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS, YOU CAN SEE THE HOT SEPARATED FROM THE OTHERS. WHEN WE MOVE ON TO THE PROPRIETARY FUNDS, THESE ARE YOUR BUSINESS FUNDS. ALL OF THE PARKS THAT ARE RUNNING AS A SEPARATE BUSINESS ON THEIR OWN, AND THE SAME PROCESS IS [02:40:04] USED WHERE YOU START WITH THE ANNUAL AUDITED FINANCIAL REPORT NUMBER FROM 93022 AND YOU ADD IN THE PROJECTED ACTIVITY FOR THIS CURRENT FISCAL YEAR AND THEN NEXT FISCAL YEAR, THEN THE END AT THAT POINT. ONE OF THE THINGS WE'VE DONE ON OUR END, JUST TO BETTER PROVIDE A PICTURE OF WHAT'S GOING ON. THERE'S REALLY THREE DIFFERENT TYPES OF FUNDING IN THE PARK BOARD BUDGET. THERE'S A HOT-FUNDS. THERE'S NON HOT-FUNDS, WHICH IS YOUR GENERAL FUND AND YOUR DEBT SERVICE AND THEN THERE'S YOUR PROPRIETARY FUNDS. AND TO UNDERSTAND HOW OPERATIONS ARE WORKING IN THESE VARIOUS AREAS. YOU CAN SEE THAT WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE ENDING FUND BALANCE IN THESE THREE SEPARATE CATEGORIES, THE COMBINED FUND BALANCE AND HOT-FUND IS VERY HEALTHY. THIS INCLUDES ALL THE FUNDING THAT THE CITY HOLDS AS WELL. WE'RE GOING TO GET TO THAT IN A LITTLE BIT. BUT THE PARK BOARD BUDGET IS INCLUSIVE OF THE FUND BALANCE THAT THE CITY RECEIVED BACK IN NOVEMBER OF 2022. THIS INCLUDES THE PORTION THAT'S AT THE CITY AND THEN THE NON-HOT-FUND AND PROPRIETARY FUND. THIS IS HOW THE COMBINED FUND BALANCE LOOKS IN EACH OF THESE [INAUDIBLE]. >> MAY I ASK A QUESTION? >> SURE. >> WHAT EXACTLY IS NOURISHED BEACH? >> THAT WOULD BE A PARK BOARD QUESTION. >> ACTUALLY. I DIDN'T WANT TO INTERRUPT ON THIS. THERE'S NO SUCH CATEGORY. THAT'S A MADE-UP CATEGORY. IF YOU BACK UP TO THAT FIRST FUND BALANCE PRESENTATION WHERE YOU HAVE THAT ONE. WE HAVE THE BLUE OVER THE NOURISHED BEACH. THE LAW ACTUALLY MENTIONED SAND REPLENISHMENT, NOT NOURISHED BEACH. THE SAND REPLENISHMENT. SILO IS ALSO LAID OUT PRETTY SPECIFICALLY IN THE MANAGEMENT AGREEMENT WITH THE CONVENTION OR THE CONVENTION CENTER FROM 2000 TO THE CITY, THE PARK BOARD, AND THE LENDERS ARE ALL SIGNATORIES TO THAT. THERE'S NO PLACE. THERE'S A CONTEMPLATED NOURISHED BEACH. SILO. >> I KNOW SO WHAT IS IT? >> WELL, THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT PLACES WHERE THE SAND HAS BEEN PUT DOWN. OR LIKE SHEILA SAYS THEY CAN BETTER DEFINE WHAT THAT IS, BUT THAT IS NOT A HOT CATEGORY. THE HOT CATEGORY IS SAND REPLENISHMENT. >> WE'LL LOOK AT THE FUNDING IN A LITTLE BIT. THE TWO SANDS THAT COMES FROM THE STATE IS WHAT'S BEING ALLOCATED BETWEEN BEACH CLEANING, BEACH PATROL, AND NOURISHED BEACH. >> THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING IS IN ERROR. >> [INAUDIBLE] THE WHOLE NOURISHED BEACHES. SORRY. >> NO, IT'S OKAY. MAYBE SOMEONE FROM PARK BOARD CAN ANSWER THE QUESTION, BUT I DON'T SPECIFICALLY KNOW WHAT THE DETAIL IS ABOUT. >> THIS IS THE QUESTION THAT COUNCILMAN ROB HAS. IS KIMBERLY THERE? >> BRYSON, I THINK. >> BRYSON. >> JUST A MOMENT. I'M GOING TO MAKE SURE EVERYTHING IS BACK RIGHT. [LAUGHTER] >> IT'S GOING TO BE ON CAMERA. >> NEED TO THROW YOUR PRESENTATION OFF TRACK HERE YOUR HONOR. >> I KNOW BUT I'M GLAD [OVERLAPPING] AND IT'S NEVER BEEN IN CATEGORY AND NOW ALL OF A SUDDEN. >> IF YOU COULD IDENTIFY YOURSELF, PLEASE, SIR. >> YES. MY NAME IS BRYSON FRAZIER. I AM THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER FOR THE GALVESTON PARK BOARD OF TRUSTEES. NOURISHED BEACH. NOURISHED BEACH IS OUR BEACH PROJECT FUND. IT ALSO HELPS SUPPLEMENT SOME OF THE BUDGET IN BETWEEN THE BEACH PATROLS. AS WE LAY NEW SAND, CREATE NEW BEACH. WE USE SOME HOT FOR THOSE PROJECTS AND THAT'S THE PORTION OF THE STATE HOT THAT COMES BACK TO NOURISHED BEACH. THEN THERE'S A PORTION OF THAT HOT THAT WE USE TO CLEAN AND MAINTAIN THAT BEACH ONCE IT GETS ITS SLATE. BUT IT'S ESSENTIALLY OUR BEACH NOURISHMENT. >> DOESN'T THAT FALL UNDER BEACH CLEANING? >> BEACH CLEANING DOES MAINTENANCE AND TRASH PICKUP AND STUFF LIKE THAT. THIS IS MORE YOUR NOURISHMENT LIKE WHAT WE DID AT BABE'S BEACH. >> THAT WAS PAID FOR BY FEDERAL FUNDS, COOPERATE FUNDS AND IDC FUNDS. >> THERE'S THE LOCAL MATCH PORTION OF A LOT OF THOSE THINGS. THEN OF COURSE, WITH ALL THE GRANTS BEING ON A REIMBURSEMENT SCHEDULE, YOU HAVE TO EXPEND THE FUNDS FIRST AND THEN YOU CAN REQUEST REIMBURSEMENT BACK. >> I FELT THE MATCH WAS DONE BY THE IDC FUNDS. >> THERE ARE SOME, ABSOLUTELY. WE'RE EVEN LOOKING AT FUTURE PROJECTS TO YOU. IT JUST DEPENDS UPON THE STRUCTURE OF THE GRANT, DEPENDS UPON WHAT THE LOCAL MATCH IS. OF COURSE, THERE IS A MAINTENANCE COMPONENT TO ALL OF THIS STUFF. THAT'S ESSENTIALLY WHAT THAT NOURISHED BEACH FUND IS. >> THAT CATEGORY HAS EXISTED FOR HOW LONG? >> SINCE I'VE BEEN HERE. YEAH, SO IT EXISTED BEFORE I GOT HERE. >> IT'S ALWAYS CALLED NOURISHED BEACH? >> THERE WAS ANOTHER NAME FOR IT AND IT WAS ASSOCIATED WITH THE STREETS ALONG SEAWALL. BUT YEAH. [OVERLAPPING] NO IT WASN'T SEAWALL. >> IT WAS 1261ST STREET WHERE IT WAS REFERRED AS TO NOURISHED BEACH. BUT YES. IT IS THEN A FUND CATEGORY IN THE PARK WITH THE BUDGET FOR QUITE SOME TIME. [02:45:04] >> HOW LONG? >> IT SHOULD BE PROBABLY AT LEAST THE LAST FIVE YEARS OR MORE. I CAN GET A DEFINITE ANSWER IF YOU WANT TO HAVE. >> MY POINT TO THIS IS THERE'S NOWHERE IN STATE LAW OR THE MANAGEMENT AGREEMENT THAT MONEY IS ALLOCATED TO THE NOURISHED BEACH. THE 0.57 IS ALLOCATED TO BEACH RENOURISHMENT, WHICH IS A TINY LITTLE NEGATIVE BALANCE OVER HERE. THAT'S IN THE MANAGEMENT AGREEMENT AT LEAST, AND I THINK IN OUR ORDINANCE IS VERY SPECIFIC FOR THAT PURPOSE. THAT'S ONE OF MY COMPLAINTS ABOUT WHAT I SEE IN THIS BUDGET AND MAYBE WE'LL GET TO THAT IN THE PRESENTATION. BUT TRANSFERS OUT OF THIS, I'VE ALWAYS COMPLAINED ABOUT INTER-FUND TRANSFERS AND I THINK THIS IS ONE THAT VIOLATES A CONTRACT AMONG OTHER THINGS. >> DAVID, ARE YOU JUST TALKING ABOUT A NAME OF A CATEGORY? [OVERLAPPING]. >> WELL, THEY'RE TRANSFERRING OUT OF THESE FUNDS. [OVERLAPPING] >> THERE ARE TWO CATEGORIES ON THE SCREEN, WHICH IS SAND REPLACEMENT. >> BUT YOU'RE SAYING SAND REPLACEMENT IS NOT WHAT THE ACTUAL DEFINITION IT SAYS. >> SAND REPLENISHMENT. >> REPLENISH THE WORK. THAT'S NOT EVEN CORRECT. >> I WOULDN'T ARGUE WITH YOU ABOUT THAT, BUT IT'S CERTAINLY NOT [INAUDIBLE]. >> THERE'S REPLACEMENT IN ONE AND NOURISH IN RATHER, BUT THE NOURISHED. WE NEED TO PICK SOME LANGUAGE. >> I WOULD AGREE WITH YOU EXCEPT THAT THE SAND NOURISHMENT OR THE NOURISH BEACH CATEGORY IS BEING USED AS A CATCH-ALL FOR MONEY TO BE TRANSFERRED INTO OTHER FUNDS, AND I DON'T THINK THAT'S PROPER. >> THAT WOULDN'T BE A GOOD. I GET WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, DAVID. BUT THAT'S NOT THE COMPLETE STORY. NOURISH BEACH DOES COVER THE SAND REPLENISHMENT SIDE OF THINGS. THAT FUND ISN'T GETTING USED ANYMORE. IT'S ESSENTIALLY ACCOMPLISHING THE SAME THING. IT'S NOURISHING THE BEACH AND GETTING NEW SAND LAID. ABSOLUTELY, WE USE SOME OF THE HOT THAT IS ALLOCATED TO THAT FUND TO COVER SOME OF THE UPFRONT COSTS, AND THEN AS WE LAY NEW BEACH, OF COURSE, THERE'S THE COST TO CLEAN, AND MAINTAIN IT, AND PATROL IT. THOSE ARE THE TRANSFERS THAT ARE COMING OUT OF IT TO BEACH CLEANING AND BEACH PATROL. >> I UNDERSTAND THERE'S LOGIC BEHIND IT, BUT I'M JUST SAYING THAT'S NOT PER CONTRACT. THAT'S NOT WHAT THE MANAGEMENT CONTRACT CONTEMPLATES. >> I DON'T WANT TO ARGUE ABOUT CONTRACTS. I KNOW ABSOLUTELY IT'S GOOD. >> I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT BECAUSE IT HAS SPARKED BOARDS A SIGNATORY TO THAT CONTRACT WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT CERTAIN AMOUNT OF MONEY WOULD BE SPENT ON THAT CATEGORY AND IT'S NOT BEING. >> WELL, THERE IS A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF MONEY ABSOLUTELY BEING SPENT ON EACH NOURISHMENT WE HAD THAT PROJECT THAT JUST GOT COMPLETED. [OVERLAPPING] IT WAS MORE THAN THAT. I THINK IT WAS SOMETHING LIKE 12, THAT LAST. >> [INAUDIBLE] EXTENDED. >> IT WASN'T JUST THE ART, SO RIGHT THERE WAS THE [OVERLAPPING] [INAUDIBLE] FUNDING BY DC. >> I'M TOLD ALLOCATED HOT BEING EXPENDED IN THAT CATEGORY. >> LET'S LET SHEILA FINISH YOUR PRESENTATION AND THEN WE'LL COME BACK AND DISCUSS THAT. GO AHEAD, SHEILA. >> THIS DEMONSTRATES THIS SPLIT ON THE FUND BALANCE IN THESE VARIOUS CATEGORIES, AND IT SPEAKS TO THE FINANCIAL HEALTH AND EACH AREA OF RESPONSIBILITY. [OVERLAPPING] >> IF YOU COULD GO BACK, PLEASE SHEILA ON THIS SLIDE, THE TOTAL THESE OUT, THEN WE'VE GOT ABOUT 16 MILLION, IS THAT RIGHT? >> THAT'S INCLUSIVE OF THE PORTIONS WITH THE CITY AND WE'RE GOING TO SPEAK TO THAT IN A LITTLE BIT. I HAVE A SLIDE THAT SPLITS THAT OUT. I WOULD CAUTION THOUGH ABOUT NETTING AND COMBINING THESE FUND BALANCES IN THAT HOT FUNDS CAN NEVER BE USED FOR THE PROPRIETARY AND SUCH, AND SO THERE IS SOME CAUTION TO BE USED WHEN DOING THAT. THE HOT FUND BUDGET SPECIFIC TO WHAT WILL BE APPROPRIATE OR APPROVED RELATED TO HOT FUND ALLOCATIONS AND FUNDING FOR THE YEAR AND THE EXPENDITURES THAT ARE ASSOCIATED WITH THAT. THE CITY HAS ESTIMATED THAT THE REVENUE PER PENNY THIS COMING YEAR IS GOING TO BE 3.3 MILLION, AND FOR THE SIX PENNIES, THAT INCLUDES FOUR FROM THE CITY TO FROM THE STATE, THAT'S 19.8 MILLION. TO LOOK AT THIS PORTION OF THE BUDGET, WE REMOVE GRANTS IN CAPITAL ITEMS. WE DID INCLUDE DEBT SERVICE BACK IN THOUGH BECAUSE I THOUGHT IT WAS PROBABLY APPROPRIATE TO HAVE THAT THERE. WE'VE GONE BACK AND FORTH ON THE WAYS TO LOOK AT THIS AND PRESENT THIS. THE CITY TYPICALLY COMPARES OUR BUDGETED YEAR WITH THE PROJECTED FROM THE PREVIOUS YEAR, SO THAT'S THE COMPARISON THAT WE USED ON THE CITY SIDE. ON THE HOT REVENUE PORTION, YOU'LL SEE THE ALLOCATIONS OF THE PENNY FOR EACH PORTION. BEACH CLEANING IS GETTING HALF A PENNY FROM LOCAL HOT TAX AND 0.76 CENTS OF THIS STATE, TWO PENNIES. YOU CAN SEE THE ALLOCATIONS THERE. THE TOTAL IS THE 6TH CENTS. LAST YEAR, THE PROJECTED REVENUE IS 16.1 MILLION, [02:50:03] AND FOR THE BUDGET YEAR IT'S THE 19.8 MILLION AND THAT IS WHAT'S BEING ALLOCATED AS THE REVENUE COMING INTO THE PARK BOARD THIS YEAR. THAT'S ABOUT A $62.7 MILLION INCREASE, WHICH IS ABOUT 22.8% INCREASE IN REVENUE YEAR-OVER-YEAR. THE OPERATING EXPENDITURES, WE HAVE PULLED OUT, AS I SAID, THE GRANTS AND THE CAPITAL WHICH AREN'T NECESSARILY FUNDED BY YOUR MAINTENANCE REVENUE. YOU'LL SEE THE PROJECTED TOTAL AND THESE FOUR FUNDS FOR FY23 IS ABOUT 16.6 MILLION AND THE BUDGET FOR THIS COMING YEAR THAT IS ASKING FOR APPROVAL AND HAS BEEN APPROVED BY THE TRUSTEES IS ABOUT 20.6 MILLION. THIS IS AN INCREASE OF ABOUT 3.9 MILLION, WHICH IS ABOUT A 23.8% INCREASE. THE BUDGET THAT COUNCIL HAS RECEIVED FROM THE TRUSTEES RELATED TO THE HOT ALLOCATION OF FUNDING AND EXPENDITURES IS, A SUCCINCTLY AS I POSSIBLY COULD PRESENTED HERE. IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS, WE CAN ASK THE PARK BOARD TO SPEAK TO IT OR I CAN SPEAK TO WHAT I KNOW. THE FUND BALANCE AS IT RELATES TO WHAT PORTION IS WITH THE CITY AND WHAT PORTION IS WITH PARK BOARD. IN NOVEMBER 2022, HALF OF THE HOT FUND BALANCE APPROXIMATELY THAT WAS AT THE PARK BOARD WAS TRANSFERRED BACK TO THE CITY. GOING BACK TO THAT ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT FROM SEPTEMBER 30TH OF LAST YEAR THAT OCCURRED BEFORE THE TRANSFER WAS MADE. HOWEVER, THE RESULTS OF IT WERE, I SHOULD SAY, THE AUDIT OCCURRED AFTER THE TRANSFER WAS MADE. HOWEVER, IT WAS BASED ON A DATE BEFORE THE TRANSFER WAS MADE. THAT'S THE NUMBER WE START WITH. THERE WAS ABOUT 28.4 MILLION IN FUND BALANCE IN THE HOT FUNDS, AND ABOUT 14.19 WAS TRANSFERRED TO THE CITY. THAT INCLUDES THE ARTS AND CULTURAL EVENTS PIECE, WHICH I HAVE OFFSET BECAUSE THE CITY HAS TAKEN THAT FUNCTION BACK. THEN, WHAT ENDED UP BEING RETAINED BY THE PARK BOARD WAS ABOUT 14.2, 14.3 MILLION. >> PARDON ME. >> YES. >> THIS IS BEFORE THE TRANSFER. THE 14.29 IS A DESCRIPTION OF WHAT? >> WAS THE FUND BALANCE THAT REMAINED WITH THE PARK BOARD WHEN WE REMOVE THE CITY'S PORTION. >>AFTER THE DECISION WAS TAKEN BACK. >> CORRECT. THE TOTAL WAS 28.4 MILLION, AND THE PORTION THAT CAME TO THE CITY WAS 13.1 RELATED TO THOSE FOUR BUCKETS, AND THEN AN ADDITIONAL ONE MILLION RELATED TO ARTS AND CULTURAL EVENTS. THEN WHAT WAS RETAINED AT THE PARK BOARD WAS IN THOSE FOUR BUCKETS AND IT TOTALED 14.2. >> THANK YOU. >> ONCE AGAIN, USING THE SAME BUDGET NUMBERS THAT PARK BOARD ADOPTED, THE PROJECTED AMOUNTS FOR 23, ENDING FUND BALANCE, PROJECTED AMOUNTS FOR 24, AND ENDING FUND BALANCE. IF WE LOOK AT THE BOTTOM THREE LINES, YOU'LL SEE THERE'S THE TOTAL AMOUNT WHICH IS A 19.5 MILLION IS WHAT'S THE TOTAL PROJECTED ENDING FUND BALANCE AT THE END OF FISCAL YEAR 24. THE CITY-HELD PORTION PRESENTED HERE HAS NOT CHANGED AT ALL. THERE'S SOME INTEREST, BUT I DIDN'T WANT TO CLOUDY THE PRESENTATION AT ALL, CALLED THE PRESENTATION. THE PARK BOARD BALANCE AT THE END OF THE FISCAL FY24 FISCAL YEAR WILL BE ABOUT 5.3 MILLION. BASED ON THE PREVIOUS SLIDE, MAINTENANCE, AND OPERATIONS COST OF 20.6 MILLION. LOOKING AT THAT 34.5 MILLION OF THEIR PROJECTED EXPENDITURES TOTAL, THAT MEANS THAT THERE'S ABOUT 13.9 IN GRANTS, CAPITAL ASSETS IN SPECIAL PROJECTS. THE FUND BALANCE OF 5.3 MILLION REPRESENTS ABOUT 95 DAYS OF OPERATIONS BASED ON THAT 20.6 MILLION. IF THE CITY AND PARK BOARD WANTED TO MAINTAIN THE FUND BALANCE AT 120 DAYS BASED ON THAT MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONS BUDGET, IT WOULD BE ABOUT $6.7 MILLION. THE DISCUSSIONS WE'VE HAD AMONG STAFF IS THAT AFTER THE FY23 AUDIT IS COMPLETED, THEN POTENTIALLY, THE CITY MIGHT MOVE ABOUT 1.4 MILLION FROM OUR PORTION OF THE FUND BALANCE TO THE PARK BOARD TO MAKE THAT 120 DAYS WHOLE. I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. I WENT THROUGH THAT PRETTY QUICKLY. >> I HAVE A QUESTION, THIS'S FOR YOU. DO YOU KNOW YOUR BYLAWS? DOES IT REQUIRE 90 OR 120 DAYS? >> ONE HUNDRED AND TWENTY [OVERLAPPING]. >> ONE HUNDRED AND TWENTY IS IT? PARK BOARD BYLAWS REQUIRE THAT MATCH THE CITY'S 120 DAYS. >> ALL FUNDS ARE JUST IN GENERAL? >> IN GENERAL. >> WELL, THAT'S A VERY GOOD POINT. NOT HOT. I GUESS YOU'D HAVE TO ASK THE QUESTION. WHAT PORTION OF THAT IS HOT? >> WE COULD DEFINITELY GET INTO THAT. [OVERLAPPING] >> I DON'T GET BACK INTO THAT. >> YEAH. >> I JUST WANT TO NO, THAT'S 120 DAYS. >> YES, SIR. YOU GOT. >> ANOTHER ITEM THAT WE LOOKED AT WAS THE INTER-FUND TRANSFERS AND THE PRESENTATION THAT'S BEEN IN THE PARK BOARD BUDGET FOR A VERY LONG TIME. [02:55:03] IT'S A TEMPLATE THAT WAS RECEIVED BY THE PEOPLE WHO CURRENTLY DID THE BUDGET WAS A LITTLE HARD TO FOLLOW AND HOW THE MONEY WAS MOVING UNTIL HE COMPILED IT ALL INTO ONE. ALONG THE LEFT-HAND SIDE, YOU SEE THE FUNDS WHERE MONEY IS MOVING OUT OF, AND ACROSS THE TOP IS WHERE IT'S MOVING TO, AND YOU SEE THE DESCRIPTIONS AND THE TOTALS FOR EACH FUND. THE ITEMS I [NOISE] WANTED TO HIGHLIGHT WAS A TRANSFER. IT'S FROM HOT FUNDS THAT ARE SOURCED BY HOT TO NON-HOT, WHICH MOST OF THAT IS RELATED TO GENERAL FUND. THEN THERE'S THIS BERM REMOVAL PIECE THAT THEY'RE DOING ONE THING AT RAF FELL. THEN THE PURPLE YOU SEE IS TRANSFERS FROM THE PROPRIETARY FUNDS TO HOT IN GENERAL. THE GENERAL FUND RECEIVES ALL ITS FUNDING, OBVIOUSLY FROM ALL THE OTHER FUNDS. THEN ALSO YOU SEE THAT THERE'S TRANSFERS INTO BEACH PATROL FROM THE OTHER CITY PARKS FOR THE PATROL, THEIR RECEIPTS. >> THEY'RE TRANSFERRING FROM BEACH PLANNING AND BEACH PATROL? FROM NOURISH SPEECH. >> TO THOSE TWO FUNCTIONS, CORRECT. THERE'S $350,000 FROM NOURISH BEACH GOING BOTH TO BEACH CLEANING AND BEACH PATROL. >> THE GENERAL FUND ON THAT LINE? >> NOURISH BEACHES PUTTING 188 INTO THE GENERAL FUND AND THAT'S THE ONLY TRANSFER COMING OUT OF NOURISH BEACH. >> THOSE ARE RESTRICTED FUNDS THAT ARE BEING TRANSFERRED INTO THE GENERAL FUND WHICH IS CURRENTLY IN A NEGATIVE BALANCE. >> MY UNDERSTANDING AND PARKER CAN SPEAK TO THIS A LITTLE MORE PROBABLY IS THERE IS A STUDY THAT SETS THE PARAMETERS FOR HOW HOT FUNDS CAN BE USED FOR OPERATIONS. MY UNDERSTANDING IS, IS THOSE FOUR TRANSFERS FROM THOSE FOUR HOT FUNDS TO THE GENERAL FUND IS WITHIN THE LIMITS OR THE GUARDRAILS SET BY THAT STUDY. >> JUST ABOUT 10%. [NOISE] REALLY ANSWERS A LOT OF QUESTIONS. >> FINALLY AND I DIDN'T PRINT OUT THE WHOLE BUDGET FOR EVERYONE, BUT YOU DID RECEIVE IT BY EMAIL. ON PAGE 15 OF THE BUDGET, YOU HAVE THE LIST OF ALL THE CAPITAL ITEMS THAT ARE INCLUDED IN THEIR BUDGET AND THESE ITEMS TOTAL ABOUT 6.8 MILLION. THE ITEMS COMING FROM THE PARKS, THE PROPRIETARY FUNDS ARE ABOUT $700,000 AND THERE'S AN ADDITIONAL TRANSFER FOR RAF THAT ARE RELATED TO THE TICKET BOOTH THAT CAN'T COME FROM HOT FUNDS, ITS USE OF UNRESTRICTED MONEY IN THOSE SPECIFIC FUNDS. BUT SO ESSENTIALLY, THE AGENDA ITEM FOR LATER TODAY IS STRUCTURED SO THAT COUNCIL CAN PROVIDE A PROVISIONAL APPROVAL OF A PORTION OR ALL OF THE PRESENTED BUDGET. IT WILL ALLOW THEM TO HAVE FUNDING FOR THE FIRST QUARTER, WHICH IS REALLY IMPORTANT AND IT IS ALL OF OUR PRIORITY TO MAKE SURE THEY'RE FULLY FUNDED. THE FIRST-QUARTER OF THAT 19.8 MILLION HOT THAT THEY'VE REQUESTED, WOULD BE ABOUT 4.95 MILLION IN STARTING OCTOBER 1ST. THIS WOULD ALSO ALLOW AN EXECUTION OF THE INTERIM HOT CONTRACT BASED ON THOSE NUMBERS. THIS WOULD ALLOW TIME OR WILL ALLOW TIME FOR ANY REQUESTS FOR CHANGES TO THE BUDGET OR ANY ADDITIONAL INFORMATION THAT COUNCIL MAY NEED TO FINALLY APPROVE THE BUDGET IN ITS ENTIRETY. THIS WILL ALSO ALLOW COUNSEL TO REVIEW THAT CAPITAL PROGRAM AND DECIDE HOW THEY WANT TO FUND IT. LAST YEAR, COUNCIL HOLD ALL THOSE ITEMS BACK AND I BELIEVE THEY WERE BROUGHT BACK SEPARATELY BY THE PARK BOARD FOR APPROVAL OR IT CAN BE SIMPLY APPROVED AS A PART OF THE PRESENTED BUDGET. I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS OR I KNOW PARK BOARD IS HERE AS WELL. >> THAT'S FINE. IF I'M DOING MY MATH HERE CORRECTLY, THE DELTA IN THE ADMINISTRATIVE COST GIVEN THE MAXIMUM STEADY TRANSFERS ARE MAXIMIZED. NO PUN INTENDED. THAT THIS 2.484 BOTTOM LINE HERE, TRANSFERS INTO THE GENERAL FUND. YOU HAVE TO SUBTRACT OUT THE [OVERLAPPING] ABOUT $400,000, BUT IT'S ABOUT TWO MILLION DOLLARS INCREASE FOR THE GENERAL FUND FROM HOTEL TAX FOR ADMINISTRATIVE PURPOSES. >> CORRECT. >> I FIND THAT CONCERNING, 22% ON THE INCREASE IN ADMINISTRATIVE FUND AT THE HOTEL. >> I FIND A LOT OF THINGS CONCERNING IN THE BUDGET. BUT AND I READ THROUGH THE EXPLANATIONS THAT WE WERE GIVEN. I CERTAINLY WILL PROVE A CONDITIONAL PROOF OF THEIR BUDGET TO MAKE SURE THEY HAVE THEIR FUNDING FOR FIRST QUARTER. [03:00:02] BUT THERE ARE SO MANY QUESTIONS THAT EVEN WITH THE EXPLANATION THAT WAS RECEIVED, I THINK THAT NEEDS TO BE ANSWERED. >> I WILL SAY IN OUR MEETING WITH PARK BOARD THIS WEEK, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WAS DISCUSSED WAS THEY ARE BEGINNING TO HAVE MEETINGS WITH THEIR TRUSTEES RELATED TO A PLAN TO ADDRESS THE DEFICIT AND SEVERAL FUND BALANCES. BUT THAT MAY BE SOMETHING THAT THE TRUSTEES CAN COME BACK WITH, AND A MORE FLESHED-OUT PLAN THAT WOULD PROBABLY BE OF INTEREST TO COUNCIL. >> IF IN FACT AND THIS IS IF COUNCIL WANTS TO MOVE IN THE DIRECTION OF PROVISIONALLY APPROVING THIS BUDGET FOR THE FIRST QUARTER. BRIAN AND BRYSON WHEN DO YOU THINK YOU'LL BE BRINGING THIS BACK IN THE COUNCIL FOR FINAL APPROVAL? >> WHAT WE WOULD NEED IN THE FIRST STEP, I APPRECIATE STAFFS WORKING WITH THIS. THEY SPENT A LOT OF TIME ON THIS. THERE'S THE PRESENTATION STYLE POINTS, THERE'S THE AESTHETIC STYLE POINTS THAT WE COULD PROBABLY INCORPORATE FAIRLY QUICKLY. WHEN IT COMES TO THE PLAN FOR THE FUND BALANCE FOR THOSE THREE PARTICULAR FUNDS, I'LL POINT OUT THAT WE DO HAVE A PLAN AND WE HAVE BEEN IMPROVING THE FUND BALANCE FOR THOSE IN THE THREE YEARS THAT I'VE BEEN HERE. BUT TO THE SUGGESTION OF STAFF AND WE THINK IT'S A GOOD IDEA, LET'S FORMALIZE THAT AND LET'S BRING IT TO THE TRUSTEES FOR RATIFICATION. I ANTICIPATE THAT WE CAN DO SOMETHING LIKE THAT BEFORE THE END OF THE YEAR. I WOULD ASSUME PROBABLY SOMETIME IN NOVEMBER. THE REASON WHY I SAY THAT IS I'D LIKE TO TAKE THIS THROUGH OUR FINANCE COMMITTEE AND THEY'RE NOT MEETING IN OCTOBER. I WOULD PROBABLY BRING THAT THROUGH THEM IN NOVEMBER. THAT WOULDN'T BE THE FIRST TIME STAFF WOULD SEE IT. OF COURSE, AS SOON AS WE CAME UP WITH A DRAFT PLAN, I WOULD SOCIALIZE IT WITH THE TRUSTEES AND THEN OF COURSE, TALK TO STAFF AND MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE ALL ON THE SAME PAGE, AND THEN BRING IT BACK FOR CONSIDERATION AT THAT POINT. >> EXCUSE ME, DAVID, BUT A FOLLOW UP ON THAT. IF WE PROVISIONALLY APPROVE THE HOT CONTRACT ALSO TODAY, IF COUNCIL MOVES IN THAT DIRECTION, THAT GIVES PARK BOARD TIME TO SIT DOWN AND GO THROUGH THIS HOT CONTRACT AND YOU TALK WITH CITY STAFF SO THAT COULD BE BROUGHT BACK TO US AT THE SAME TIME, IS THAT CORRECT? >> I THINK WE CAN PROBABLY HAVE IT DONE BY THEN. >> I DON'T WANT TO GO OUT OF MY LANE HERE. BUT WHAT'S WITH YOUR FINANCE COMMITTEE? THEY'RE NOT MEETING IN OCTOBER [LAUGHTER] GET ON THESE PEOPLE. WE DON'T WANT TO BE LOOKING AT CHRISTMAS STILL HAVING THIS CONVERSATION. >> I COMPLETELY AGREE. THAT'S THE FINANCIAL PLAN FOR THOSE AND NEGATIVE FUND BALANCES. WHEN IT COMES TO THE ACTUAL BUDGET ITSELF, IF WE GET A PROVISIONAL HERE AND WE CAN GET A FINAL APPROVAL LATER ON, THAT COULD HAPPEN SOONER. >> WE HAVE DAVE. DAVID, DID YOU GET YOUR QUESTIONS? >> THAT'S MY QUESTION. THANK YOU. >> JOHN. >> TWO QUESTIONS. WHY ARE WE SAYING THIS IS A PROVISIONAL BUDGET? BECAUSE I WOULD NOT BE WILLING TO RUBBER STAMP. I'M CONFUSED ON WHY EVEN USE THE TERMINOLOGY UP THERE IT SAID OPTIONS WE'RE APPROVING ALL OR NONE. WHY WE'RE USING THE WORD PROVISIONAL? [OVERLAPPING] >> SO THAT WE CAN FUND Q1. >> WHY USE THE WORD PROVISIONAL THOUGH? IT'S Q1 PROVISIONAL? >> MAY I ADDRESS THAT? IT'D BE MY UNDERSTANDING AND BRIAN, SHEILA, CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG. THE PROVISION WOULD BE YES, YOU'RE APPROVING THE BUDGET FOR WHAT YOU'RE APPROVING. IT IS CONTINGENT UPON US WORKING OUT SOME OF THESE OTHER ISSUES. IF THERE IS A PRESENTATION STYLE, OKAY, LET'S WORK THAT STUFF OUT. IF WE NEED TO PLAN FOR THOSE NEGATIVE FUND BALANCES, THOSE WORK, THOSE THINGS AT ONCE. THAT STEP IS ESTABLISHED AND PUT IN PLACE. WELL, THEN YOU HAVE APPROVAL OF THE BUDGET. AM I MISUNDERSTANDING? >> WELL, I DON'T THINK THAT'S ALL THERE IS TO IT. BUT YEAH. >> SEPARATE TERMS, IF COUNCIL COLLECTIVELY SAYS YOU'RE SPENDING $10 TOO MUCH ON SOMETHING, WE'RE GOING TO FUND THEM FULLY BASED ON WHAT THEY'VE REQUESTED IN THE FIRST-QUARTER WOULD PULL THEY'LL KNOWING THAT YOU'LL BE ABLE TO WORK AT ANY DIFFERENCES IN THE REMAINING QUARTERS. IF COUNCIL CHOOSES TO WITHDRAW THAT $10. >> PER THE CONTRACT, WE'D HAVE TO DO A TRUE UP AT THE END OF THE YEAR ANYWAY. >> EXACTLY, WHICH WE DO. >> SAME QUESTION IS, YOU ASKED BRYSON WHEN THEY WOULD COME BACK TO COUNCIL? >> YES, SIR. >> DO YOU SEE ANYTHING THAT WE NEED TO DO BEFORE HE COMES BACK TO COUNCIL? BECAUSE I FURTHER THAT BY SAYING, I DON'T UNDERSTAND HOW THEY CAN GO AND DO SOMETHING WHEN THEY HAVEN'T BEEN TOLD WHAT WE WANT. >> I'M GOING TO PUT IT IN MY TERMINOLOGY. [NOISE] AS WE TALKED ABOUT AT OUR LAST MEETING, WE HAVE TWO COMPONENTS OF THIS BUDGET. ONE IS THE ACCOUNTING FORMAT THAT THE CITY AND THE PARK BOARD IS WORKING OUT TO COME TOGETHER ON. MY SENSE IS THAT'S NOT TOTALLY COMPLETED YET. THERE NEEDS TO BE A FEW OTHER THINGS THAT NEED TO BE ADDRESSED BEFORE WE HAVE THAT. [03:05:02] THAT'S ONE OF THE THINGS. FROM THE STANDPOINT, THEY NEED TO WORK BETWEEN STAFFS TO MAKE SURE ALL OF THAT IS THE T'S ARE CROSSED AND THE I'S ARE DOTTED. >> WE HAVE CONVEYED THAT. >> I THINK WE'RE ON THE SAME PAGE WHEN IT COMES TO THE PRESENTATION STYLE. >> THAT IS CORRECT ON THAT. THE OTHER THING, THE DECISIONS ON THE BUDGET ITSELF AND EXPENDITURES, THAT'S CALLS ON COUNCIL'S OBLIGATION RESPONSIBILITIES HERE. WE GOT A DOCUMENT FROM BRYSON HERE LAST NIGHT, I THINK BRYSON SENT OVER SOME MORE CLARIFICATION ON THIS BUDGET THAT HAS NOT BEEN DISTRIBUTED YET TO ALL OF COUNCIL. >> [OVERLAPPING] THERE IS A SECOND ONE AFTER THE 17TH AND CAN I MAKE A REQUEST OF YOU WHEN YOU SEND THIS DOCUMENT, NUMBER YOUR PAGES? >> ABSOLUTELY. >> BECAUSE I DROPPED THE OLD ONE AND I'M LIKE. >> I PERSONALLY WOULD LIKE TO TAKE SOME TIME TO GO THROUGH THIS AND THE DESCRIPTION AND DOCUMENTATION THAT BRYSON SENT OVER TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND THIS BUDGET COMPLETELY HERE. THAT DOESN'T MEAN I HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THE BUDGET. I JUST NEED TO UNDERSTAND IT MORE THOROUGHLY. >> YOU DIDN'T REALLY ANSWER OUR QUESTION HERE. >> GO AHEAD. >> WHAT I DON'T WANT TO HAPPEN SINCE WE HAVE NOT GIVE THEM ANY GUIDANCE ON WHAT WE WANT TO SEE. YOU ARE EXPECTING HIM TO BRING BACK A BUDGET FOR APPROVAL HERE WITHOUT GIVING ANY GUIDANCE ON THE ACTUAL BUDGET. I DON'T KNOW HOW THAT IS ACCOMPLISHED PRODUCTIVELY. >> WELL, I THINK YOU BRING UP A GOOD POINT, JOHN. I'M JUST GOING TO PULL THIS OUT OF THE AIR. IF THERE'S A COMPONENT OF THE BUDGET THAT WE DON'T WANT THEM TO HAVE IN THE BUDGET, THEN WE NEED TO TELL THEM. >> THAT'S RIGHT. >> [OVERLAPPING] SAYING. >> DO WE NEED TO HAVE A MEETING AT OUR OCTOBER MEETING ADDRESS THOSE THINGS SO THAT THEY HAVE THEIR INPUT? >> I THINK YOU'VE GOT TO GIVE THEM SOME GUIDANCE. [OVERLAPPING] >> YEAH, I'M SAYING I AGREE. >> WE'RE GOING THROUGH THIS PROCESS AND WE HAVE GIVEN THEM NOTHING TO GO BY AND THEN THE FINAL HOUR WE'RE HERE SAYING, WE DON'T LIKE THE BUDGET. WE NEED YOU TO COME BACK AND GIVE US SOMETHING THAT WE LIKE WITHOUT GIVING THEM INFORMATION OR WHAT WE WANT. >> I THINK THERE'S TWO THINGS THAT JOHN SAYS THERE AT ONE, YOU'RE RIGHT. WE'RE SITTING HERE AT THE LAST MINUTE, BUT YOU JUST GOT SOME OF IT LAST NIGHT TOO, SO THAT'S WHY WE'RE PROVISIONAL. BUT I AGREE, COMMUNICATION IS KEY HERE. WE HAVE TO MANAGE THE EXPECTATIONS HERE. >> WE HAVE NOT DONE THAT. >> I THINK STAFF HAS BEEN PRETTY CLEAR IN WHAT WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE. THE COUNCIL HAS NOT HAD A CHANCE TO WEIGH IN ON WHAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO SEE AND THAT'S THE PIECE THAT'S MISSING. >> YEAH. I THINK YOU BRING UP A GOOD POINT. I LIKE MORRIS THOUGHT WE COULD DO THIS OCTOBER 26TH GIFTS COUNCIL TIME TO LOOK AT ALL THIS. BUT IF WE DO THAT COUNCIL, WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT EACH COUNCIL MEMBER REACHED THROUGH ALL THIS MATERIAL AND THOROUGHLY AIR STANDARD. KEEP IN MIND, IF COUNCIL HAS OPERATIONAL CONCERNS WITH THE BUDGET, THEY SHOULD BRING THEM UP WITH CITY STAFF AND WE'LL ADDRESS IT WITH PARK BOARD STAFF THAT'S APPROPRIATE WAY, AT LEAST BY OUR CHARTER. >> THERE'S NO ONGOING. >> THAT'S WRONG. HOWEVER, IF THERE IS A OVERARCHING POLICY ISSUE THAT COUNCIL HAS IN THE BUDGET THAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE PARK BOARD ADDRESSED, THAT ISN'T ENTIRELY APPROPRIATE MANNER FOR YOU TO HAVE THAT DISCUSSION WITH THE PARK BOARD. >> YOU CAN DO THAT? >> CAN YOU GIVE ME EXAMPLE OF AN OPERATIONAL PROCEDURE OR WHAT YOU SAID? OPERATIONAL PROCEDURE? >> WE DON'T LIKE THAT YOU'RE TRANSFERRING MONEY BETWEEN HERE AND HERE OR WE NEED A BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF HOW YOU'RE ACCOUNTING FOR THIS AND THAT THAT'S OPERATION. >> SEEMS LIKE YOU ALL ARE WORKING ABSOLUTELY TOGETHER ON IT. >> WE'VE GOT DONE. >> BUT IF YOU HAVE A FUNDAMENTAL ISSUE WITH THE PROJECT OR YOU HAVE A FUNDAMENTAL ISSUE WITH MONEY COMING FROM [INAUDIBLE] BALLPARK GOING TO A BEACH PATROL, I SAW THAT ON THERE, THAT WOULD BE A POLICY ISSUE THAT COUNCIL COULD TAKE UP WITH THE PARK BOARD. >> MAYBE THAT'S WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR FROM MARIA AND DAVID. YOU ALL HAVE SOME ISSUES WITH THIS BUDGET, I THINK? >> YES. >> YEAH. >> I LIKE TO HEAR WHAT THOSE ISSUES ARE. >> WELL, I MEAN, THERE'S INCREASES THAT ARE UNEXPLAINED. THERE'S BALANCED TRANSFERS. APPARENTLY THERE WAS ANOTHER DOCUMENTS SENT OUT TO EXPLAIN IT, WHICH WE HAVEN'T RECEIVED. I WOULD LIKE TO REVIEW THAT AND I WOULD LIKE WE COULD HAVE A JOINT MEETING WITH PARK BOARD IN OCTOBER WHERE. [03:10:02] >> THERE WAS A DETAILED EXPLANATION OF ALL THE TRANSFERS THAT WAS SENT OUT ABOUT TWO WEEKS AGO. >> YEAH. WE GOT THAT. I GOT ONE FROM YOU LAST NIGHT. >> SORRY, MR. MAYOR DIDN'T MEAN TO CUT YOU OFF. THAT WAS SPECIFIC TO THE HOT BUDGET. >> YES. OKAY. THANK YOU. I HADN'T HAD A CHANCE TO READ THROUGH IT. >> CAN WE BE SURE THESE THINGS ARE ALL DISTRIBUTED TO COUNSEL? >> YES, WE WILL. >> OKAY. BECAUSE I DO HAVE SOME QUESTIONS AND CONCERNS ABOUT THE BUDGET, ABOUT THE WAY SOME OF THESE THINGS ARE DONE, SOME OF IT IS POLICY, SOME OF THAT I THINK IS LEGAL AND I'M NOT READY TO GO INTO IT TODAY BECAUSE WE'LL BE HERE FOREVER. BUT THERE ARE THINGS WE NEED TO TALK ABOUT. BUT DON IS RIGHT THERE, TWO LAYERS HERE. ONE IS THE OPERATIONAL LAYER AND THE TRUSTEES GIVE YOU DIRECTION. COUNCIL GIVES HIM DIRECTION. YOU GUYS DEAL WITH THIS. I DON'T LIKE THIS IDEA OF MIX AND MATCH. WE'VE GOT SOME TRUSTEES AND SOME COUNCIL MEMBERS AND SOME STAFFERS IN THESE NEGOTIATIONS. THIS IS A CONTRACT NEGOTIATION WITH THE FORMAT OF THIS, HOW THIS IS PRESENTED, AND SO FORTH. WHAT WE'RE PROVING, THE EXPENDITURES, WHAT ARE YOU DOING WITH IT, THAT THING. THAT'S POLICY AND I THINK WE ALL SIT IT OUT AND WE NEED TO SIT DOWN WITH LABELED IN OCTOBER AND TALK ABOUT THAT. BUT WE NEED TO FORMALIZE AND EXPRESS THESE THINGS TO STAFF SO THAT WE KNOW WHAT'S OPERATIONAL EXCELLENCE. >> BUT THIS IS MY CONCERN COUNCIL, AND LET ME MAKE SURE WE HAVE A NEW MEMBER OF OUR SITTING AT THE TABLE. JASON, INTRODUCE YOURSELF. >> JASON HART CASTLE, CHAIR OF THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES. >> OKAY. IF WE HAVE CONCERNS WITH THIS BUDGET AND EVEN IF THEIR OPERATIONAL ISSUES, THIS NEEDS TO BE DISCUSSED AT THE COUNCIL LEVEL. FOR INDIVIDUAL COUNCIL MEMBERS TO GO TO BRIAN AND START TELLING HIM ALL THESE THINGS AND HE'S OVER THERE OPERATIONALLY CHANGING THINGS, THIS MAY OR MAY NOT BE WHERE WE WANT TO GO AS A COUNCIL. >> PROBABLY THE QUESTIONS I HAVE QUESTIONS ABOUT THE LEGALITY OF CERTAIN THINGS. OH, BY ALL MEANS. BUT TO SAY WE, IF THERE ARE OPERATIONAL CHANGES [OVERLAPPING]. >> IT'LL BE GOOD TO HAVE THOSE DISCUSSIONS IN PUBLIC. >> [OVERLAPPING] I DON'T DISCUSSION IN PUBLIC, I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT I'M ON THE RIGHT PAGE, THAT I'M ON THE RIGHT TRACK. IF I SAY IS IT LEGAL FOR THEM TO DO THIS? THAT'S A QUESTION FOR STAFF. IF I WANT TO SAY, JUST SPEND TOO MUCH MONEY, LET'S GET THIS GUY AT THE TABLE AND WE SIT AND HAVE THAT CONVERSATION, AND THEY CAN SAY, YOU KNOW WHAT, YOU WANT THIS, YOU DON'T WANT THIS, WE CAN MAKE WHAT HIS COUNSEL WANT US TO BE DOING WITH THIS MONEY. THAT'S A TRUSTEE-TO-COUNSEL CONVERSATION. LIKE I SAY, IT'S TWO LAYERS. >> IF WE GO THROUGH THAT, AND I THINK JOHN BRINGS UP A GOOD QUESTION, BUT IF WE DO THAT, IT GOES BACK TO THE TOPIC OF PROVISIONAL APPROVAL OF THE BUDGET SO THAT WE'RE PROVISIONALLY PROVING THIS FIRST QUARTER FOR THEM TO MOVE FORWARD AND THEN THAT GIVES US TIME TO HAVE OUR DISCUSSIONS AND FINAL GUIDANCE FOR THEM FOR THE FINAL BUDGET. >> FALLING UNDER THE FORMAT DISCUSSIONS. PART OF THE FORMAT DISCUSSIONS THAT WE'RE HAVING IS HOW WE CAN BETTER STREAMLINE THIS PROCESS SO WE'RE EVEN QUICKER AND MORE EFFICIENT WITH IT NEXT YEAR SO WE CAN DECOMPRESS THIS WHOLE THING. IT'S HARD BECAUSE WE'RE BOTH DOING THE SAME THING AT THE SAME TIME AND WE'RE TRYING TO ALIGN, BUT THAT'S PART OF THE DISCUSSIONS THAT SHEILA AND DAN, AND I HAVE HAD WITH BRYSON AND KIMBERLY. [BACKGROUND] >> JUST FORMATTING ISSUES HERE. >> YES. CORRECT. FORMAT IS A GLOBAL TERM, MEANING WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TIMELINES AND ORGANIZATION AND THINGS LIKE THAT AS A BUDGET WHERE MORE OF THAT MORE ALONG THOSE LINES. >> JASON, YOU WANT TO SAY SOMETHING? >> YES. ON THAT NOTE, THIS IS NOT AN ISSUE THAT WE WANT TO BE BETWEEN THE PART BOARD OF TRUSTEES IN CITY COUNCIL IN PERPETUITY. WE WANT TO FIX THESE ISSUES AS BEST AS WE CAN, AS SOON AS WE POSSIBLY CAN. IT WILL TAKE MORE THAN NINE DAYS WHEN WE HAD TO HAVE A BUDGET APPROVED AND EVERYTHING BY THE END OF THE MONTH. BUT IT IS GOING BACK TO THE SPECIAL MEETING JUST AS RECENTLY AS MONDAY. IT WAS CONVEYED BY THE TRUSTEES TO PUT THIS ON A FUTURE AGENDA ITEM TO IMMEDIATELY BEGIN ADDRESSING THIS FOR THE NEXT FISCAL YEAR BUDGET PROPOSAL PRESENTATION. >> I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE A TIME FLOW HERE THAT MEETS EVERYBODY'S APPROVAL. IF WE RESEARCHED THIS MORE, COME BACK AND MEET ON THIS ON THE 26TH AND GIVE GUIDANCE THEN TO THROUGH OUR CITY MANAGER OR TO THE PARK BOARD FOR THIS BUDGET AND THEY WOULD BRING THIS BUDGET BACK IN NOVEMBER. DOES THAT GIVE YOU TIME TO DO THAT? >> WE'RE MEETING EARLY IN NOVEMBER IS GOING TO BE. >> WE'RE MEETING EARLY IN NOVEMBER AND DECEMBER. >> HOW EARLIER? >> THE 19TH. >>THE 19TH? >> THE THIRD THURSDAY, NOT THE FOURTH. >> OKAY. IF THERE ARE ANY DIRECTIONS OR CHANGES, I SHOULD SAY THE DIRECTIONS FROM COUNCIL TO CHANGE THE BUDGET OUT OF THE MEETING ON OCTOBER 26? IT'S THE 16TH. [03:15:01] >> THE 16TH. >> OF NOVEMBER. >> NO, OCTOBER. OCTOBER IS THE 26. >> NO, BUT I'M TALKING ABOUT COMING BACK AFTER WE GIVE GUIDANCE AND THEN COMING. >> HE WAS SAYING IF THERE'S CHANGES PRECIPITATED OUT OF THE TWO, HE'S TRYING TO DO HIS TIMELINE OF COUNCIL, WANTS HIM TO TURN THIS THING UPSIDE DOWN AND FLIP IT BACKWARDS. HE'S TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HIS TIME BETWEEN OCTOBER 26TH AND NOVEMBER. [LAUGHTER] THAT'S MY HOPE. THAT'S WHAT HE'S TRYING TO DRIVE DOWN HERE. >> YEAH AND WE MEET ON THE 16TH. DOES THAT GIVE YOU ENOUGH TIME? >> WOULD YOU BE GUESSING ONCE A MONTH OR A WEEK EARLY SO THAT WOULD PUT US ON THE NINTH OF 26 AND THAT WOULD GIVE US ABOUT TWO WEEKS? IT WOULD BE DIFFICULT SO I CAN'T COMMIT 100%, BUT I WOULD MAKE EVERY EFFORT TO TRY TO HAVE IT READY BY NOVEMBER 16TH. WE ALL CAN HAVE A MERRY CHRISTMAS AND A HAPPY THANKSGIVING. THANKS. [LAUGHTER]. >> I WANT TO EMPHASIZE SOMETHING. I HAVE QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS, BUT I WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT PART BOARD PERSONNEL AND YOUR VENDORS, AND OUR CLIENTS UNDERSTAND. WE'RE NOT TRYING TO DEFUND ANYTHING HERE. I WANT TO BE SURE THAT THE Q_1 IS ADEQUATELY COVERED, THAT YOUR RESERVES ARE ADEQUATELY COVERED, THAT IT'S AN ONGOING OPERATION. WE HAVE GLITCHES BETWEEN US THAT WE'VE BEEN WORKING ON. I THINK WE NEED TO CONTINUE THAT AND COUNCIL HAS, I THINK, BEEN DERELICT IN ITS DUTY FOR SEVERAL YEARS AND PROVIDING CLEAR, CONCISE DIRECTION TO PARK BOARD ON WHAT WE WANT YOU TO DO. IT'S LIKE SOME OF THOSE THINGS GOT SET IN LAW, SOME OF THEM GOT SET BY TRADITION. SOME OF YOU GUYS DO A LOT OF THINGS FOR US. IT'S NOT WRITTEN DOWN ANY PLACE. THAT'S JUST THAT'S HOW WE DO IT. I'M OKAY WITH MOST OF IT IS JUST WE HAVE NOT BEEN GOOD ABOUT EXPRESSING THESE THINGS TO THE PARK BOARD. PEOPLE SAY, WELL, YOU'RE COMING BACK TO THE LAST MINUTE. IT'S ALWAYS THE LAST MINUTE WHEN OUR BUDGETS ARE ON THE SAME TRACK, THERE'S SOME ROUGH SPOTS BECAUSE WE GET THROUGH OUR BUDGET OR YOU'RE READING THROUGH YOUR BUDGET THEN WE HAVE TO REVIEW THIS ONE AND SO FORTH. I JUST WANT PEOPLE TO UNDERSTAND THAT YOUR STAFFS ARE DOING A GREAT JOB. I DON'T HAVE A BAD WORD TO SAY ABOUT WHAT YOU'RE DOING ON BEACH CLEANING, THE BEACH PATROL, THE MAINTENANCE, THAT THING. >> NOBODY IS GOING TO BE DEFUNDED. >> NOBODY'S GOING TO BE DEFUNDED. >> YEAH, EXACTLY. >> CLEARLY, IF YOU'VE BEEN TO THE BEACH LATELY, CVP IS DOING THEIR JOB. >> AFTERNOON, WE HAVE TO APPROVE IF COUNCIL WANTS TO HELP, WE'RE GOING TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE BUDGET AND THE HOT CONTRACT. YOU COULD PUT TOGETHER IN OCTOBER AND OCTOBER 26TH MEETING. WE COULD HAVE AGENDA ITEM ON THE WORKSHOP THAT WE HAVE TO DO OUR HOMEWORK TO COME BACK WITH A LIST OF OUR THOUGHTS SO WHAT WE WANT TO GET OUT TO STAFF AND TO THE PARK BOARD ON THIS BUDGET AND THEN WE COULD SHOOT FOR NOVEMBER 16TH. IF WE HAVE TO HAVE A SPECIAL MEETING IN SOME MANNER, WE COULD STRUCTURE THERE. >> OH, WE'RE CONTEMPLATING A JOINT MEETING. >> PERSONALLY, I DON'T SEE THE NEED FOR A JOINT MEETING, BUT I WOULD LEAVE THAT UP TO COUNCIL. >> WE CAN BE AVAILABLE. I KNOW THAT THEY HAD TRUSTEES ARE REALLY EXCITED ABOUT THE LAST JOINT MEETINGS THAT WE HAD. >> DAVID THINK WE DAVID. >> THOMPSON, I SUPPORT A MEETING OF COUNCIL AND THE PARKING OF TRUSTEES, GIVEN THE FACT THAT WE'VE APPOINTED THEM TO ACT ON BEHALF OF THE BEST INTERESTS OF THE CITY AND WE'RE TRYING TO CONVEY SOME NEITHER PROCEDURAL, OPERATIONAL, OR WHATEVER POLICY ITEMS. AT THAT LEVEL, I THINK IT WOULD BE PRUDENT TO HAVE ALL OF US IN THE ROOM. >> WE HAVE AN OCTOBER 26TH MEETING. I'D HAVE TO LOOK [OVERLAPPING] >> SHARON HAS A QUESTION. >> EXCUSE ME. SHARON, GO AHEAD. >> JUST FOR CLARIFICATION. ONE OF THE PIECES OF INFORMATION WOULD YOU GUYS BE RETURNING WITH, I HEARD CONVERSATION ABOUT NOURISHED BEACH, THE WORDING THERE. WILL THAT BE CHANGED IN THESE COLUMNS OR IS INFORMATION COMING BACK TO BRING CLARITY THERE? >> I WILL BE BRINGING THAT UP WITH LEGAL AND OR COUNSEL. >> AWESOME PRESENTATION AND IT BRINGS LIGHT AND INFORMATION. WITHIN THE BUDGET WHEN THE TRANSFERS ARE MADE AND IT SAYS FROM NOURISHED BEACH AND IF THAT'S CHANGED OR WHATEVER, TO GENERAL FUND, THEN WHEN YOU GET TO GENERAL FUND, IS ITS SPECIFIC OF WHAT THIS MONEY? >> NO. THE TRANSFERS YOU SEE COMING INTO GENERAL FUND AND STOP ME IF I'M WRONG, OR WHAT IS FUNDING EVERYTHING IN THE GENERAL FUND. ALL THE GENERAL FUNCTIONS, OPERATIONAL FUNCTIONS IN THE GENERAL FUND, ALL OF THAT MONEY IS COMPILED TO FUND IT. >> NO SPECIFIC. [03:20:01] >> THE GENERAL FUND ENCOMPASSES OUR ACCOUNTING DEPARTMENTS, [OVERLAPPING] EXECUTIVE MANAGEMENT, HR, ALL THAT OTHER OVERHEAD AND STUFF, THE BUILDING. >> MY GENERAL QUESTION WAS EVERY TIME IT'S TRANSFERRED INTO THE GENERAL FUND, IS THERE A BREAKDOWN WHEN IT SAYS BEACH CLEANING FOR THAT AMOUNT OF MONEY, IS THERE A BREAKDOWN AS TO OKAY. >> ANYWAY, HOW DO WE GET MORE DETAIL ON THAT? >> THERE'S A DETAILED IN THE DOCUMENT THAT I SENT. WE'LL MAKE SURE THAT WE CIRCULATE IT AGAIN. THERE'S A LISTING OF EVERY TRANSFER, ITS PURPOSE AND THEN AN EXPLANATION FOR EACH ONE. >> YOU SHOULD HAVE RECEIVED, MINE LOOKS UGLY NOW, I'VE BEEN CARRYING IT AROUND A LOT. BUT YOU SHOULD HAVE RECEIVED A PDF COPY AS A PART OF THE AGENDA ITEM IN YOUR PACKET OF THEIR WHOLE BUDGET. THEY DO HAVE VERY NICELY AT THE BACK OF EACH SECTION, THE GREEN PART IS THE DETAIL LINE ITEM ACCOUNTING OF EVERYTHING THEY HAVE BUDGETED [OVERLAPPING] >> YOU CAN SEE EXACTLY. I KNOW MS. LOUIS IS ASKING, ALL THIS GOES TO THE GENERAL FUND, WHAT ARE YOU SPENDING ON THE GENERAL FUND? THAT BREAKDOWN IS IN THERE. >> OKAY. >> JOHN. >> DAVID, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT YOU HAVE SOME ISSUES WITH, RIGHT? >> WHAT IS? >> THE TRANSFER OF HOT INTO THE GENERAL FUND? >> I HAVE NO WORDS. IT'S TRANSFER BETWEEN OTHER FUNDS. I WOULD QUESTION THE 22% INCREASE AND I'M WILLING TO HEAR AN EXPLANATION OF [NOISE] ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS MAGICALLY WENT UP EXACTLY AS MUCH AS PROJECTED HOT TAX RECEIPTS WENT UP THIS YEAR. BUT THAT'S NOT MY QUESTION. MY PROBLEM WITH INNER FUND TRANSFERS IS BETWEEN THE HOT FUNDS AND IN SOME CASES PERHAPS BETWEEN HOT AND NON-HOT FUNDS. I STILL HAVE QUESTIONS ABOUT, AND WE CAN TALK ABOUT THIS. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE HOT CONTRACT. I STILL HAVE QUESTIONS ABOUT [NOISE] THE SHARING OF REVENUE AND WHAT WE CALL UNRESTRICTED FUNDS. I'VE OBJECTED TO THE WHOLE NOTION OF AN UNRESTRICTED FUNDS MEAN YOU CAN DO WHATEVER YOU WANT WITH IT. WE'VE HAD THIS CONVERSATION FOR MONTHS WITH IT. CAN MONEY COME OUT OF A HOT FUND AND BECOME UNRESTRICTED? WELL, APPARENTLY, SMARTER PEOPLE THAN US HAVE SAID, YEAH, SURE. WHY NOT? [LAUGHTER] I DON'T HAVE AN OBJECTION TO THAT. BUT THEN WHAT HAPPENS TO IT? HOW'S IT ACCOUNTED FOR? WHERE IS IT IN THIS BUDGET? HOW IS IT APPLIED? I HAVE QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT. THAT'S POLICY. >> IF WE HAVE A MEETING AND COUNCIL WANTS TO DO A JOINT MEETING, WE NEED AT LEAST TWO HOURS ON THE 26TH, PROBABLY MORE. >>NOW I RECOMMEND SOMETHING? >> YES, SIR. >> THAT WE DO IT BEFORE THE 26TH BECAUSE IF WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A JOINT MEETING THEN WE WANT TO COME OUT OF THAT WITH ANY SIGNIFICANT CHANGE UNTIL JASON AND MS. FRAZIER, GET US A NEW BUDGET BY THE 9TH OF NOVEMBER, 26TH IS LATE TO DO THAT. >> IF WE CAN MOVE THAT UP. I WAS TENTATIVELY COUNTING ON A COMBINED PART WASHBOARD MEETING AROUND THE 12TH OF OCTOBER, BUT WE COULD BUMP THAT. >> I KNOW THIS HAS BEEN A MEETING AND WE'RE NOT EVEN DONE WITH THIS MONTH YET. [LAUGHTER] THIS HAS BEEN A MEETING INTENSE YEAR. BUT THIS I THINK IS FUNDAMENTAL. I THINK WE GET THIS STRAIGHTENED OUT NOW. WE'RE NOT GOING TO HAVE THIS CONVERSATION NEXT YEAR. I THINK SOMETHING SIMILAR IS TRUE OF THE PORT. WE GET THIS STRAIGHTENED OUT THIS FALL. WHEN WE DO GET TO THIS $100 MILLION THING IN THE SPRING, WE'LL HAVE A MUCH BETTER UNDERSTANDING. WE'LL BE ABLE TO SAY YES, NO, OR HERE ARE OUR CONCERNS WITHOUT ALTHOUGH. >> IF WE COULD MEET BEFORE THE 26, THAT GIVES BRYSON AND SHEILA AND EVERYBODY, THE PARK BOARD MORE TIME TO MAKE THE CHANGES THAT COUNCIL MAY [OVERLAPPING] >> I'D BE VERY SUPPORTIVE OF AN EARLIER MEETING [OVERLAPPING]. >> WITH REGARD TO THE CIP, HAVE WE APPROVED ANY OF THE CIP FROM THIS PAST YEAR? >> NO. >> THERE'S SOME ITEMS FROM THE CURRENT FISCAL YEAR, FY23 THAT HAVE BEEN APPROVED, YET THEY SPAN MULTIPLE YEARS, SO YOU'LL SEE THEM IN THE 24 CIP AS WELL. THEN THERE'S GOING TO BE OTHER PROJECTS THAT HAVEN'T COME TO COUNCIL FOR CONSIDERATION THAT WOULDN'T NEED TO. >> I WOULD JUST SAY BECAUSE I THINK THE HOT CONTRACT WE'RE LOOKING AT NOW CONTEMPLATES CHANGING HOW THAT'S DONE. OR ISN'T AS CLEAR ON HOW THAT'S DONE, AND I THINK AS STAFF WE'VE TRIED TO STRAIGHTEN THAT OUT OVER THE LAST YEAR. I THINK WE NEED TO LOOK AT THAT. I'M NOT OPPOSED TO DOING A LARGER LOOK, AN EARLIER LOOK AT CIP APPROVAL. BUT I'M NOT SURE WE HAVE THE PROCESS TO DO THAT RIGHT NOW. [03:25:01] I JUST DON'T LIKE THE WAY THE HOT CONTRACT READS ON THAT TOPIC. >> HOW DO YOU APPROVE A BUDGET THOUGH WITHOUT [OVERLAPPING] >> IT'S A FINE QUESTION. BUT A LOT OF THE MAJOR PROJECTS ARE COMING OUT OF THE PARKS. OR THEY'RE COMING FROM ACE, OE OR GLO OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. IT'S NOT THAT WE DON'T KNOW THE MONEY IS GOING TO GET SPENT, BUT WHAT WE'RE DOING WITH IT, ON WHAT SCHEDULE WE'RE DOING IT I THINK [OVERLAPPING] >> THEY'RE A LITTLE DIFFERENT SITUATION AS WE HAVE TO SET OUR BUDGET SO WE CAN BACK INTO OUR TAX RATE. THEIR MONEY SET, THEY'RE BACKING A BUDGET INTO WHAT THEY'VE GOT COMING IN. >> SURE. >> MAKES SENSE. >> THERE'S A LOT OF UNCERTAINTY THERE WHEN YOU APPROVE THE BUDGET AND YOU DON'T APPROVE A CIP AND YOU CAN'T GO [OVERLAPPING] >> BUT THAT'S WHAT WE DO THAT EVERY YEAR. WE SAY THEY BRING US THE FIVE-YEAR LOOK ON THE CIP. WE HAVE CONVERSATIONS ABOUT WHETHER WE WANT TO DO THIS, DO THAT. BUT THE ONE YEAR IS WHAT'S KEY. THAT'S WHAT I THINK IS MUDDLED IN THE HOT CONTRACT IS THE ONE YEAR. WE ALL GO THROUGH THIS PROCESS. WELL, WHAT IT TAKES TO PROPOSE A PROJECT AND GET BUSY ON A PROJECT, AND GET APPROVAL TO DO A PROJECT. THIS STEP THAT TAKES, WE'RE SPENDING GOVERNMENT MONEY. THE FACT THAT IT TAKES THREE TIMES AS LONG SHOULDN'T HAVE SAID ANYBODY. BUT IF YOU'VE GOT A ONE-YEAR CIP, YOU DON'T WANT TO WAIT TO Q3 AND THAT FISCAL YEAR BEFORE YOU GET APPROVAL TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THAT PROJECT. WE NEED A BETTER, [NOISE] CLEARER UNDERSTANDING UPFRONT OF WHAT THOSE PROJECTS ARE. GET OUR OPINION IN ON THIS, DECIDE WHAT THE TIMELINE AND THE EXPENDITURE AND ALL THAT STUFF. IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE IN THIS BUDGET TO SAY WHAT YOU'RE BUILDING NEXT SUMMER, NECESSARILY. >> THAT'S ABSOLUTELY RIGHT. YOU'VE PROVEN THE ONE YEAR, YOU'RE LOOKING AT IT FROM A ONE-YEAR SNAPSHOT. >> MIKE SEND HIS HAND UP. >>BRIAN, [NOISE] WHEN THEY SET THE PENNY FOR YOUR SALES TAX AND THEN YOU FIGURE OUT THE TOTAL AMOUNT. YOU BACK INTO THAT TOTAL AMOUNT? >> NO. >> NO. HOW DO YOU COME UP WITH THIS SALE? >> WE DON'T SET A PENNY ON SALES TAX. SALES TAX IS BASED ON PREVIOUS YEAR ESTIMATES. [OVERLAPPING] BUT THE PRIMARY THING THAT WE'RE TRYING TO SET IS THE AD VALOREM TAX RATE. BECAUSE REMEMBER, SALES TAX, IT ALREADY HAS AN OFFSET ON AN AD VALOREM TAX, SO THAT HAS TO BE CALCULATED INTO IT. BUT THE MAJORITY OF OUR BUDGET AD VALOREM. >> BUT ONCE YOU'VE ESTABLISHED WHAT THE ESTIMATE MIGHT BE OR THE PROPOSED, YOU BACK INTO THAT NUMBER? >> NO. IF WE DID, WE WOULD HAVE GONE ALL THE WAY UP TO THE 3 1/2 %. >> NO. HE'S TALKING ABOUT SALES TAX. YOU PROJECTED SALES TAX, AND THEN YOU BASED YOUR BUDGET ON THAT PROJECTION? >> SURE. >> THAT'S HOW YOU DO IT? >> BUT IT'S THE SMALLEST PART OF IT BECAUSE YOU'VE GOT TO HAVE AD VALOREM IT'S THE BIGGEST PART. >> BUT WE CAN SERVITABLY ESTIMATE. WE DON'T BUDGET ON THE ENTIRE AMOUNT OF THAT BUDGET [OVERLAPPING]. >> BECAUSE WHAT I'M SAYING IS YOU HAVE A FLEX IN YOUR AD VALOREM. THEY HAVE A FLEX. [OVERLAPPING] WHEN YOU'RE SETTING YOUR REVENUE. >> WE'RE TALKING ABOUT SALES TAX. WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT AD VALOREM. >> SALES TAX IS A CONSTANT, AD VALOREM IS A FLEX. >> WELL, IT'S NOT A CONSTANT EITHER IT'S A PROJECTION. >> THERE IS NOTHING YOU DO THAT SET SALES TAX. SALES TAX OCCURS THROUGH THE PURCHASES OF ITEMS AND THE RATE IS SET BY THE STATE. >> YOU PROJECT THOUGH THAT [OVERLAPPING] >> THAT'S RIGHT. YOUR BUDGET IS BALANCED THROUGH A FLEXIBLE TAX RATE THAT YOU SET ON AD VALOREM PROPERTY TAX. THEY DO NOT HAVE A FLEXIBLE PART OF THEIR BUDGET. >> POINT OF ORDER, WE'RE OFF SUBJECT. >> WELL, IT'S NOT. >> NO, THERE WAS A POINT TO IT. >> EXACTLY. >> BUT IT'S OFF SUBJECT. >> NO IT ISN'T. I'LL MAKE THE POINT NOW. [NOISE] WE SET A PENNY FOR $3.3 MILLION. WE NEVER GAVE ANY INSTRUCTIONS TO THE PARK BOARD ABOUT WHAT TO SET FOR THEIR BUDGET. THEY GO AHEAD AND THEY MAKE THEIR BUDGET BASED UPON $3.3 MILLION PER PENNY. NOBODY SAID, HEY, WE DON'T QUITE WANT YOU TO SPEND THAT MUCH MONEY. NOBODY GAVE THEM THOSE THINGS, SO THEY TURN IT IN AND BASED UPON THE VALUE. NOW WE'RE LIKE, WELL, WAIT A MINUTE. MAYBE WE DIDN'T WANT YOU TO SPEND THAT MUCH. >> I BETTER RESPOND TO THAT. >> BUT I HAVE [OVERLAPPING] MY HANDS UP. TYPICALLY, YOU BASE A BUDGET OFF PAST HISTORY AND YOUR PROJECTED NUMBER. IF YOU LOOK AT THEIR PAST HISTORY, THEY HAVE NEVER CONSUMED THE ENTIRE MOUNT OF HOT TAX. I GUESS THAT'S PART OF WHAT PROMPTS MY CONCERN, AS WELL AS THE NUMBER OF BUDGET ITEMS. I DISAGREE WITH WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. IT'S BASED OFF MANY THINGS, BUT THAT'S JUST STANDARD BUDGETING. >> THAT'S WHERE THE $29 MILLION SURPLUS, SO WE SHARE CAME FROM. BECAUSE THEY'VE NEVER MAXED THAT OUT. THIS YEAR IT'S MAXED OUT AT THE 3.3. IT DOESN'T APPEAR TO ME THAT IT'S BASED ON PROJECTED EXPENSES, EXPECTED REVENUE. IT LOOKS LIKE EXPENSES HAVE GROWN TO FILL THE REVENUE PROJECTED. [OVERLAPPING] >> WE DON'T UNDERSTAND. >> THERE'S SOME PROJECTS OUT THERE THAT THEY HAVE TO SPEND MORE MONEY ON. [03:30:04] >> I DON'T DOUBT IT. THERE'S PROJECTS WE HAVE TO SPEND MORE MONEY. >> WELL, THAT WERE UNFORESEEN, BUT WE'RE TAKING DOWN THE PAVILION. NOW WE'RE HAVING A HOUSE TEMPORARY BUILDINGS AND TEMPORARY TRAILERS AND PARK BOARD HAVING TO PURCHASE THESE THINGS. IT'S MONEY. >> THE PREVIOUS PROJECTION IN THE CIP WAS 10 MILLION DOLLARS FOR A BUILDING, 10 TO 12 MILLION DOLLARS. EARLIER BEFORE THAT IT WAS 27 MILLION DOLLARS. NOW, THERE'S 200,000 DOLLARS FOR THE TRADERS. I DON'T THINK THAT'S A FAIR COMPARISON. >> DAVID, IS THAT ACCURATE THOUGH? >> WHAT? >> THAT IN THE PAST, THEY JUST DIDN'T BUDGET FOR EVERYTHING THAT THEY PROJECTED THEY WERE GOING TO SPEND AND THEY GOT [OVERLAPPING] A SURPLUS. >> THEY DIDN'T BUDGET FOR EVERYTHING THEY WERE ANTICIPATING COLLECTING. >> IS THAT HOW THEY GOT THE SURPLUS? >> YES. ABSOLUTELY. >> WE STAYED WITHIN THE CONFINES OF OUR APPROVED BUDGET OVER THE LAST FEW YEARS, ESPECIALLY AS WE EMERGE OUT OF THE PANDEMIC, IT EXPLODED. >> BUT THE COMBINED BUDGET WAS A PROJECTED NUMBER, RIGHT? >> I'M SORRY, SAY IT AGAIN? >> THE CONFINED BUDGET WAS A PROJECTED NUMBER. >> WELL, YEAH. BUT [OVERLAPPING] >> YOU WENT INTO A PANDEMIC, YOR BUDGET WAS AND WE THINK WE NEED TO CONSERVE MONEY BECAUSE WE DO NOT THINK WE'RE GOING TO GET OUT OF THIS. WE PROJECTED A BUDGET, WE PROJECTED A REVENUE STREAM, A REVENUE AMOUNT. THEY BASED THEIR BUDGET ON THAT PROJECTION. >>THEY [OVERLAPPING] >>NO, THEY DID. [OVERLAPPING]. >>THEN IT CAME IN MUCH HIGHER. >> THAT'S WHERE THE[OVERLAPPING]. >>THE REVENUE CAME IN MUCH HIGHER THAN THE PROJECTION. >> THAT'S WHERE A GOOD PORTION OF THIS EXCESS REVENUE CAME FROM. >> THEY NEVER SAID, "HEY MEN, WE'RE GOING TO GET 10 MILLION DOLLARS THIS YEAR. LET'S ONLY SPEND FIVE. >> RIGHT? >> THAT NEVER HAPPENED. >> NO, BUT THEY DID LOOK AT THEM [OVERLAPPING] >> THAT'S WHAT I HEARD YOU SAY. THAT THEY PROJECTED A BUDGET THAT WAS MUCH LOWER THAN THEIR ANTICIPATED REVENUE THIS YEAR. >> THE BOTTOM LINE OF THIS BUDGET IS, THE EXPENSES IN THIS BUDGET ARE BASED ON PROJECTED RECEIPTS. >> YES. >> IT'S NOT ENOUGH PROJECTED. THE BUDGET IS BASED ON PROJECTED RECEIPTS, NOT BASED ON PROJECTED EXPENSES. >> THAT'S WHAT WE DO EVERY YEAR. WE DO THAT HERE WITH OUR SALES TAX. WE PROJECT OUR SALES TAX AND WE BASE OUR BUDGET ON THAT PROJECTION. >> [OVERLAPPING] WE KNOW THAT'S NOT TRUE. >>[OVERLAPPING] IS THAT'S NOT TRUE? >> THAT IS NOT TRUE. >> WE DON'T PROJECT OUR SALES TAX? >> WE PROJECT OUR SALES TAX, BUT OUR BUDGET IS NOT SOLELY BASED ON SALES TAX. >> I DIDN'T SAY IT WAS. >> WELL, YOU JUST DID. YOU SAID WE SET OUR BUDGET BASED ON THE PROJECTION [OVERLAPPING]. >> ALRIGHT. >> WE PROJECT OUR BUDGET BASED ON A NUMBER OF THINGS. ONE OF THOSE IS A PROJECTED SALES TAX. >> YES, BUT WE OVERRUN THAT BY MILLIONS OF DOLLARS EVERY YEAR. >> [OVERLAPPING] BECAUSE THEY HAVE A REVENUE STREAMS. >> NOT BECAUSE WE HAVE, BUT THERE ARE OTHER OVERSEAS. BUT THEN WE CALCULATE EXPENSES, AND DECIDE HOW MUCH WE NEED AND THEN ADJUST THE AD VALOREM TAX RATE TO MATCH THAT. >>[OVERLAPPING] WHAT IS THE MAXIMUM WE CAN GET OUT OF [OVERLAPPING] >> YOU CAN HAVE THAT AS A SIDE DISCUSSION AS WE GET THROUGH FROM IN. LET'S STAY WITH THE PARK BOARD BUDGET. I'VE GOTTEN DIRECTION FROM COUNCIL, PLEASE GUIDE ME. I'M GOING TO LOOK AT A SPECIAL MEETING, OF A COMBINED MEETING OF THE TRUSTEES AND OUR COUNCIL TO GIVE GUIDANCE, AFTER WE'VE EVALUATED THIS BUDGET, SO THAT THEY CAN TAKE THAT BACK. IF THERE'S ANY TYPE OF CHANGES OR WHATEVER NEEDS TO BE DONE, THAT WILL BE DONE THROUGH EITHER BRIAN OR GIVEN DIRECTION TO THE PART FOUR. >> OKAY. >> OKAY. VERY GOOD, JASON. >> I SUSPECT THAT I WOULD LOSE MY CHAIRMANSHIP, IF I DON'T GO AHEAD AND CONVEY THE CONSENSUS AND THE WISHES OF THE TRUSTEES. THERE'S TWO THINGS THAT CAN BE TRUE AT ONCE. WE ALL AS TRUSTEES WOULD LIKE TO SEE OUR BUDGET FULLY APPROVED AS PRESENTED. IT REMOVES UNCERTAINTY, IT ENABLES US TO PLAN, IT ENABLES US TO MOVE FORWARD AND I DO BELIEVE, IT'S MY PERSONAL OPINION. WE HAVE EXHIBITED GOOD FAITH AND THE EFFORTS TO COOPERATE AND COLLABORATE BETWEEN OUR STAFF AND CITY STAFF, AS WELL AS THE TRUSTEES AND CITY COUNCIL. IF THAT BUDGET IS APPROVED AS IT IS PRESENTED, THERE'S ANOTHER THING THAT CAN BE TRUE AS WELL. THERE WILL BE CONTINUED COOPERATION AND THERE WILL BE CONTINUED COLLABORATION ON THIS. THIS IS GOING TO BE A POLICY MOVING FORWARD THAT WE DO ASSIMILATE OUR BUDGET PROPOSALS, MUCH MORE SIMILAR, AS SIMILAR AS WE CAN GET IT TO WHAT WHAT THE CITY'S BUDGET PROPOSALS ARE. [03:35:03] WE ARE GOING TO STILL BE HERE TO TAKE COUNCIL DIRECTION AS WELL. ALL OF THAT CAN BE TRUE AT ONCE EVEN IF THE BUDGET IS APPROVED AS PRESENTED LATER TODAY. THANK YOU FOR ALL THE OPPORTUNITIES TO WORK WITH ALL OF YOU AS WELL. >> THANK YOU, JASON, I APPRECIATE IT. ANYMORE? >> ONE LAST THING. >> YES SIR. >> SHEILA CAME ON BOARD HERE AND HAD TO LEARN THE ENTIRE CITY BUDGET, AND SHE DID A FANTASTIC JOB WITH IT. THEN WE TESTED HER WITH ABSOLUTELY LEARNING THE PARK BOARD BUDGET, WHICH I'M NOT EVEN SURE ANY OF US HERE FULLY UNDERSTAND PROBABLY, EXCEPT FOR SHEILA AND BRYSON. THANK YOU, SHEILA, FOR YOUR HARD WORK. >> [OVERLAPPING] YEAH. NO, ABSOLUTELY. I WOULD LIKE TO CONVEY MY THANKS TO SHEILA AS WELL, AND TO THE REST OF THE STAFF THAT'S BEEN USEFUL AND HELPFUL TO HAVE THESE DISCUSSIONS. >> THE COUNCIL AT OUR NEXT SPECIAL MEETING, BE SURE THAT WE'VE COME PREPARED WITH OUR THOUGHTS ON HOW WE WANT TO GOT, BECAUSE THIS MEETING COULD GO ON FOR A LONG TIME, IF NOT. VERY GOOD. >>THANK YOU SHEILA, VERY MUCH. >> THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. THANKS BRYSON. [3.F. Discussion Of An Amendment To Chapter 9, “Bicycles”, To Amend Regulations Regarding Lighting Requirements On Motor Assisted Scooters (Finklea/Bouvier - 10 Min)] >> [NOISE] PLEASED TO KNOW. >> ITEM 3F. DISCUSSION OF AN AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER NINE, BICYCLES, TOUR MEN REGULATIONS REGARDING LEARNING REQUIREMENTS ON MOTOR ASSISTED SCOOTERS. THANK YOU. >> COUNCIL MAN [INAUDIBLE]. >> THANK YOU THERE. THE ORIGIN OF THIS REQUEST TO CHANGE THE ORDINANCE CAME FROM A DISCUSSION BETWEEN MYSELF AND COUNCIL MEMBER VBA. AFTER A RECENT NEWSPAPER ARTICLE IN THE BOSTON DAILY NEWS ABOUT A SCOOTER-VEHICLE ACCIDENTS, IN WHICH THE SCOOTER OPERATOR WAS SIGNIFICANTLY INJURED. I LOOKED INTO TEXAS TRANSPORTATION CODE AS IT RELATES TO SAFETY EQUIPMENT FOR MOTORIZED SCOOTERS. IN FACT MOTORIZED SCOOTERS, THESE ARE THE ONES THAT HAVE TWO WHEELS, AND YOU PUT YOUR FEET ON THE DECK. THE TEXAS TRANSPORTATION CODE IS NOTICEABLY VOID OF ANY CONVERSATION ABOUT SAFETY EQUIPMENT AND OPERATION OF MOTORIZED SCOOTERS. THE ONLY STATEMENT THAT IT MAKE ON SAFETY, IS SECTION 551.352, WHICH IS SECTION B OF THE COUNTY MUNICIPALITY MAY PROHIBIT THE OPERATION OF A MOTORIZED SCOOTER, IF IN THE INTEREST AND SAFETY. WE'RE NOT AFTER TRYING TO BAN THEM. WHAT WE ARE TRYING TO DO IS TRYING TO MAKE THE OPERATION OF THEM SAFER, PARTICULARLY AT NIGHT. THE ONE WHICH HAS PROPOSED IN THE ORDINANCE, ADDRESSES THAT REQUIRES THAT [INAUDIBLE] ASSISTED SCOOTER IS EQUIPPED WITH A LAMP THAT EMIT WHITE LIGHT VISIBLE TO THE DISTANCE OF 500 FEET, AND THEN A RED LIGHT IN THE BACK VISIBLE FROM DISTANCE OF 500 FEET. I'D LIKE TO NOTE THAT THIS IS THE SAME LANGUAGE IN THE TEXAS TRANSPORTATION CODE THAT IS APPLICABLE TO BICYCLES AND MOTORIZED BICYCLES AS WELL. WE WOULD LOVE A DISCUSSION ON IT OR ANY CLARIFICATION. THANK YOU. >> DAVID, I JUST WANT TO SAY THANK YOU FOR BRINGING THIS FORWARD. AND MIKE, THANK YOU FOR BRINGING THIS FORWARD. I DIDN'T EVEN REALIZE THAT WE DIDN'T ALREADY DO THIS. IT JUST MAKES COMMON SENSE TO DO THAT. WHEN WOULD THIS COME BACK TO US? YOU'RE LOOKING IN OCTOBER TO COME BACK TO THIS? >> THAT WOULD BE GREAT IF WE COULD. >> DON IS NODDING HIS HEAD. >> EXCUSE ME. >> DON IS NODDING HIS HEAD WHEN YOU SAID, OKAY. >> OKAY. >> SOUNDS GOOD. I THINK IT'S ALREADY DONE, TO BE HONEST. >> [INAUDIBLE]. >> YES, MA'AM. >> WOULD THERE BE ANY ROOM TO ADD TO THIS? I DON'T KNOW IF ANYONE HAS SEEN THAT NEW ELECTRONIC LIKE RIDE ON SKATEBOARDS SITTING. YOU'LL SEE THEM GOING DOWN THE SEAWALL, YOU'RE THERE. THE HEIGHT OF THE PERSON AND THE THING IS ABOUT TWO FEET AND THEY'RE CROSSING THE STREET. IT COULD BE, WE ADD ANY ELECTRONIC? >> BUT, IT'S GOT A LOT IN HERE, ABOUT NOT LIMITED TO ELECTRIC BIKES, MOTOR SITTER SCOOTERS. I GUESS WE COULD KEEP GOING ON IT. >> I DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT'S CALLED. >>WHY DON'T WE [OVERLAPPING] >> YEAH. COUNCIL MEMBER ONE, I CAN LOOK INTO THAT. I DID LOOK INTO THESE ONE WHEELED PLATFORM BIKES. BUT ALL OF THOSE ARE ALREADY BEING SOLD WITH REAR REFLECTORS ANALYTES. THE MOTORIZED SKATEBOARDS, I'M LOOKING THAT UP RIGHT NOW. THERE IS NO LANGUAGE IN THE TEXAS TRANSPORTATION CODE RELATED TO MOTORIZED SKATEBOARDS. BUT, CERTAINLY I CAN DO THAT ALONGSIDE WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY AND SEE IF THERE'S ANYTHING THAT WE NEED TO DO. >> I'LL TAKE A PICTURE THE NEXT TIME I SEE ONE AND SEND IT TO YOU. >> I DO KNOW THE EXACT VEHICLE THAT YOU'RE REFERRING TO. >> OKAY. >> MAY I OFFER A SUGGESTION? WHY DON'T WE ADOPT THE SCOOTER THING NEXT MONTH? IT WOULD BE LIKE A DRAFT ON A SKATEBOARD THING FOR THE EXPENSE OF WORKSHOP. THAT WAY WE KEEP IT GOING. >> OKAY. [03:40:01] >> KEEP IT GOING. >> ANY OTHER COMMENTS ON THIS SIDE OF THE COUNCIL? VERY GOOD. WE'VE ALREADY REVIEWED 3G. IT'S 12:49 PM. [4. EXECUTIVE SESSION] WE ARE GOING INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION. PURSUANT TO TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE, SECTION 551.072, DELIBERATION REGARDING REAL PROPERTY. TO DISCUSS THE PURCHASE, EXCHANGE, LEASE OR VALUE OF REAL PROPERTY, PELICAN ISLAND BRIDGE, AND 4B, PURSUANT TO TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE, SECTION 551.074. PERSONNEL MATTERS TO DELIBERATE, THE APPOINTMENT, EMPLOYMENT EVALUATION, REASSIGNMENT DUTIES, DISCIPLINE OR DISMISSAL OF A PUBLIC OFFICER, OR EMPLOYEE, 4B ONE, CITY [INAUDIBLE] WE ARE NOW GOING INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION. >> OKAY. >> IT IS 01:53 PM. WE ARE OUT OF EXECUTIVE SESSION. WE HAVE GONE THROUGH ALL THE ITEMS ON OUR WORKSHOP AGENDA. WE ARE ADJOURNED UNTIL 05:00 PM THIS AFTERNOON. THANK YOU, COUNCIL. * This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.